Stalinist political repressions. Repressions in the USSR: socio-political meaning
The crimes of rulers cannot be imputed to those over whom they rule; Governments are sometimes bandits, peoples never. V. Hugo.
After the villainous murder of S.M. Kirov mass repressions began. On the evening of December 1, 1934, on the initiative of Stalin (without the decision of the Politburo - this was formalized by a poll only 2 days later), the secretary of the Presidium of the Central Executive Committee Yenukidze signed the following decree.
1) The investigative authorities - to deal with those accused of preparing or committing terrorist acts in an expedited manner;
2) Judicial bodies - not to delay the execution of sentences of capital punishment because of the petitions of criminals of this category for pardon, since the Presidium of the Central Executive Committee of the USSR does not consider it possible to accept such petitions for consideration;
3) The bodies of the People's Commissariat of Internal Affairs - to carry out the sentence of capital punishment against criminals of the above categories immediately after the pronouncement of court sentences.
This decision served as the basis for mass violations of socialist legality. In many falsified investigative cases, the defendants were accused of "preparing" terrorist acts, and this deprived the accused of any opportunity to check their cases even when they retracted their forced "confessions" in court and convincingly denied the charges.
It should be said that the circumstances surrounding the murder of Kirov are still fraught with many incomprehensible and mysterious things and require the most thorough investigation. There is reason to believe that the killer of Kirov - Nikolaev was helped by someone from the people who were obliged to protect Kirov. A month and a half before the murder, Nikolaev was arrested for suspicious behavior, but was released and not even searched. It is extremely suspicious that when the Chekist attached to Kirov in December 1934 was taken for interrogation, he was killed in a car “accident”, and none of the persons accompanying him were injured. After the assassination of Kirov, the leaders of the Leningrad NKVD were removed from work and subjected to very mild punishments, but in 1937 they were shot. It can be seen that they were shot in order to cover up the traces of the organizers of the murder of Kirov.
Mass repressions intensified sharply from the end of 1936 after a telegram from Stalin and Zhdanov from Sochi dated September 25, 1936, addressed to Kaganovich, Molotov and other members of the Politburo, which stated the following:
“We consider it absolutely necessary and urgent to appoint Comrade Yezhov to the post of People's Commissar of Internal Affairs. Yagoda was clearly not up to the task of exposing the Trotskyite-Zinovievist bloc. The OGPU was 4 years late in this matter. Party workers and the majority of regional representatives of the NKVD speak about this. ”Khlevnyuk O.V., 1937: Stalin, the NKVD and Soviet society. - M.: Respublika, 1992 - S.9..
By the way, it should be noted that Stalin did not meet with party workers and therefore could not know their opinion. This Stalinist attitude that “the NKVD was 4 years late” with the use of mass repressions, that it was necessary to quickly “catch up” for what was lost, directly pushed the NKVD workers to mass arrests and executions. Mass repressions were carried out at that time under the flag of the struggle against the Trotskyists.
In Stalin's report at the February-March Plenum of the Central Committee of 1937 "On the Shortcomings of Party Work and Measures to Eliminate Trotskyists and Other Double Dealers", an attempt was made to theoretically justify the policy of mass repression under the pretext that "as we move forward towards socialism," the class struggle should supposedly more and more aggravated. At the same time, Stalin argued that this is how history teaches, this is how Lenin teaches. In fact, Lenin pointed out that the use of revolutionary violence is caused by the need to crush the resistance of the exploiting classes, and these instructions of Lenin referred to the period when the exploiting classes existed and were strong. As soon as the political situation in the country improved, as soon as Rostov was taken by the Red Army in January 1920 and the main victory over Denikin was won, Lenin instructed Dzerzhinsky to abolish mass terror and to abolish death penalty. Lenin substantiated this important political event of the Soviet power in the following way in his report at the session of the All-Russian Central Executive Committee on February 2, 1920:
“Terror was imposed by the terrorism of the Entente, when all the peacefully powerful powers fell upon us with their hordes, stopping at nothing. We could not have held out even for two days if these attempts by the officers and the White Guards had not been answered in a merciless manner, and this meant terror, but this was imposed on us by the terrorist methods of the Entente. And as soon as we won a decisive victory, even before the end of the war, immediately after the capture of Rostov, we abandoned the use of the death penalty and by this showed that we treat our own program as promised. We say that the use of violence is motivated by the task of crushing the exploiters, of crushing the landlords and capitalists; when this is allowed, we will renounce all exceptional measures. We have proven it in action."
Stalin retreated from these direct and clear program instructions from Lenin. After all the exploiting classes in our country had already been liquidated, and there were no serious grounds for the mass application of exceptional measures, for mass terror, Stalin oriented the party, oriented the organs of the NKVD towards mass terror.
Only from 1929 to 1953, 19.5-2.2 million Soviet citizens became victims of Stalinist repressions. Of these, at least a third were sentenced to death or died in camps and exile. After the war, society in the socio-political sense was not simply “conserved”, but acquired some new gloomy features of a bureaucratic, police nature. Stalin managed to combine the incongruous - in every possible way to support the external enthusiasm, the asceticism of people who believed that just about, nearby, already behind the nearest pass, those very shining peaks. And then there is the constant threat of individual or mass terror.
CONCLUSION
Stalin dictatorship of repression
Since this period was too long for a more detailed consideration, I have highlighted the most prominent errors and shortcomings.
It should be noted that in Stalin's activities, along with the positive aspects, there were theoretical and political errors. Certain traits of his character had a negative effect on the structure of our country. If in the first years of work without Lenin, Stalin reckoned with critical remarks addressed to him, then later he began to deviate from the Leninist principles of collective leadership and the norms of party life, to overestimate his own merits in the successes of the party and people. A personality cult of Stalin gradually took shape, which entailed gross violations of socialist legality, caused serious harm to the activities of the party, to the cause of communist construction.
Stalin loved secrets. Big and small. But most of all he adored the mysteries of power. There were many. Often they were creepy. His biggest secret was that he managed to become a symbol of socialism. Many positive things that were born in society became a reality, primarily not thanks to, but in spite of Stalin.
The constant "secret" of influencing public consciousness was to maintain uninterrupted tension in society. Stalin knew one more “secret” of managing public consciousness: it is important to introduce into it myths, clichés, legends that are based not so much on rational knowledge as on faith. People were taught to believe in the absolute values of the "dictatorship of the proletariat". Ritual meetings, manifestations, oaths made them part of the worldview. Confidence based on truth was replaced by faith. People believed in socialism, in the "leader", in the fact that our society is the most perfect and advanced, in the innocence of power.
Stalin's life testifies to the fact that the lack of harmony between politics and morality always, in the end, leads to collapse. The historical pendulum of events in our country lifted Stalin to its highest point and lowered him to its lowest point. A person who believes only in the power of violence can only go from one crime to another.
63) Great Patriotic War 1941-1945
The Great Patriotic War (1941 - 1945) - a war between the USSR, Germany and its allies within the framework of World War II wars on the territory of the USSR and Germany. Germany attacked the USSR on June 22, 1941, with the expectation of a short military campaign, but the war dragged on for several years and ended in the complete defeat of Germany. The Great Patriotic War became the final stage of the Second World War.
Causes of the Great Patriotic War
After the defeat in World War I During the war, Germany remained in a difficult situation - the political situation was unstable, the economy was in a deep crisis. Around this time came to power Hitler, who, thanks to his reforms in the economy, was able to quickly bring Germany out of the crisis and thereby gain the trust of the authorities and the people. Standing at the head of the country, Hitler began to pursue his policy, which was based on the idea of the superiority of the Germans over other races and peoples. Hitler not only wanted to take revenge for losing the First World War, but also to subjugate the whole world to his will. The result of his claims was the German attack on the Czech Republic and Poland, and then, already within the framework of the outbreak of the Second World War, on other European countries.
Until 1941, there was a non-aggression pact between Germany and the USSR, but Hitler violated it by attacking the USSR. In order to conquer the Soviet Union, the German command developed a plan for a swift attack, which was supposed to bring victory within two months. Having seized the territories and wealth of the USSR, Hitler could enter into an open confrontation with the United States for the right to world political domination.
The attack was swift, but did not bring the desired results - the Russian army put up stronger resistance than the Germans expected, and the war dragged on for many years.
The main periods of the Great Patriotic War
The first period (June 22, 1941 - November 18, 1942) Within a year after the German attack on the USSR, the German army was able to conquer significant territories, which included Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Moldova, Belarus and Ukraine. After that, the troops moved inland with the aim of capturing Moscow and Leningrad, however, despite the failures of the Russian soldiers at the beginning of the war, the Germans failed to take the capital. Leningrad was taken under blockade, but the Germans were not allowed into the city. The battles for Moscow, Leningrad and Novgorod continued until 1942.
The period of a radical change (1942 - 1943) The middle period of the war bears such a name due to the fact that it was at this time that the Soviet troops were able to take the advantage in the war into their own hands and launch a counteroffensive. The armies of the Germans and the allies gradually began to retreat back to the western border, many foreign legions were defeated and destroyed. Due to the fact that the entire industry of the USSR at that time worked for military needs, the Soviet army managed to significantly increase its weapons and put up decent resistance. The army of the USSR from the defender turned into an attacker.
The final period of the war (1943 - 1945). During this period, the USSR began to recapture the lands occupied by the Germans and move towards Germany. Leningrad was liberated, Soviet troops entered Czechoslovakia, Poland, and then into Germany. On May 8, Berlin was taken, and the German troops announced their unconditional surrender. Hitler hanged himself after learning of the lost war. War is over.
The main battles of the Great Patriotic War
The results and significance of the Great Patriotic War
Despite the fact that the main goal of the Great Patriotic War was defensive, as a result, the Soviet troops went on the offensive and not only liberated their territories, but also destroyed the German army, took Berlin and stopped Hitler's victorious march across Europe. The Great Patriotic War was the last stage of the Second World War.
Unfortunately, despite the victory, this war turned out to be devastating for the USSR - the country's economy after the war was in a deep crisis, since the industry worked exclusively for the military industry, most of the population was killed, the rest were starving.
Nevertheless, for the USSR, victory in this war meant that now the Union was becoming a world superpower, which had the right to dictate its terms in the political arena.
64) Post-war restoration and further development of the national economy of the USSR
Difficulties of post-war reconstruction. In the first post-war years, the main task was to restore the destroyed national economy. The war caused enormous damage to the economy of the USSR: 1710 cities and towns, more than 70 thousand villages and villages, 32 thousand industrial enterprises, 65 thousand km of railway lines, 98 thousand collective farms, 1876 state farms, 2890 MTS were destroyed, 27 million died. Soviet citizens.
The United States, according to the Marshall Plan, provided colossal financial assistance to European countries in economic recovery: for 1948-1951. European countries received $12.4 billion from the US. The US offered financial assistance to the Soviet Union, but subject to control on their part over the spending of the funds provided. The Soviet government rejected this assistance under such conditions. The Soviet Union was rebuilding its economy with its own resources.
Already at the end of May 1945, the State Defense Committee decided to transfer part of the defense enterprises to the production of consumer goods. On June 23, 1945, the session of the Supreme Council adopted the Law on the demobilization of 13-age army personnel. The demobilized were provided with a set of clothes and shoes, a one-time cash allowance, the local authorities had to provide them with a job within a month. There have been changes in the structure of state bodies. In 1945, the State Defense Committee (GKO) was abolished. All functions of managing the economy were concentrated in the hands of the Council of People's Commissars (since 1946 - the Council of Ministers of the USSR). At enterprises and institutions, a normal work regime was resumed: an 8-hour working day was restored, annual paid holidays were restored. The state budget was revised, appropriations for the development of civilian sectors of the economy increased. The State Planning Commission prepared a 4-year plan for the restoration of the national economy for 1946-1950.
Recovery and development of industry.
In the field of industry, three major tasks had to be solved:
demilitarize the economy;
restore destroyed businesses;
carry out new construction.
The demilitarization of the economy was basically completed in 1946-1947. some people's commissariats of the military industry (tank, mortar weapons, ammunition) were abolished. Instead, ministries of civilian production (agricultural, transport engineering, etc.) were created. The difficulties of the transition of industry from military to civilian production were quickly overcome, and in October 1947 industrial output reached the average monthly level of 1940, and in 1948 the pre-war level of industrial output was surpassed by 18%, and in heavy industry by 30%.
The most important place in the restoration of industry was given to power plants as the energy basis of industrial regions. Huge funds were directed to the restoration of the largest power plant in Europe - Dneproges. Colossal destruction was eliminated in a short time. Already in March 1947, the station gave the first current, and in 1950 it started working at full capacity.
Among the priority recovery industries were the coal and metallurgical industries, primarily the mines of Donbass and the metallurgical giants of the country - Zaporizhstal and Azovstal. Already in 1950, coal production in the Donbass exceeded the level of 1940. The Donbass again became the most important coal basin in the country.
The construction of new industrial enterprises throughout the country has gained considerable momentum. In total, during the years of the first post-war five-year plan, 6,200 large enterprises were built and destroyed during the war were restored.
In the post-war period, the state paid special attention to the development of the defense industry, primarily the creation of atomic weapons. In 1948, a plutonium production reactor was built in the Chelyabinsk region, and by the autumn of 1949, atomic weapons had been created in the USSR. Four years later (summer 1953) the first hydrogen bomb was tested in the USSR. At the end of the 40s. The USSR began to use atomic energy to produce electricity: the construction of nuclear power plants began. The world's first nuclear power plant - Obninskaya (near Moscow) was put into operation in 1954.
On the whole, industry was restored by 1947. On the whole, the five-year plan for the production of industrial output was carried out with a large excess: instead of the planned growth of 48%, the volume of industrial output in 1950 exceeded the level of 1940 by 73%.
Agriculture. The war dealt particularly heavy damage to agriculture. Cultivation areas were greatly reduced, the number of cattle was extremely low. The situation was aggravated by the drought unprecedented in the last 50 years in 1946 in Ukraine, Moldova, the Lower Volga region, and the North Caucasus. In 1946, the average yield was 4.6 centners per hectare. The famine caused a massive outflow of people to the cities. In February 1947, the Plenum of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks considered the question "On measures to improve agriculture in the post-war period." The resolution outlined a program for the restoration and further development of agriculture.
During the years of the first five-year plan, 536,000 tractors, 93,000 grain combines, 845,000 tractor plows, seeders, cultivators, and other agricultural machinery were sent to the countryside. The number of machine operators in the MTS on collective farms and state farms has reached 1.4 million people. in 1950, large-scale work was carried out to electrify the countryside: in 1950, the capacity of rural power plants and electrical installations was three times greater than in 1940; 76% of state farms and 15% of collective farms used electricity.
In order to strengthen the collective farms in the early 1950s. the amalgamation of farms was carried out through the voluntary amalgamation of small collective farms into larger ones. Instead of 254,000 small collective farms, 93,000 large-scale farms were created in 1950. This contributed to the improvement of agricultural production, more efficient use of technology.
At the same time, in the autumn of 1946, the state launched a broad campaign against horticulture and horticulture under the banner of squandering public lands and collective farm property. Personal subsidiary plots were cut down and heavily taxed. It got to the point of absurdity: every fruit tree was taxed. In the late 40s - early 50s. dispossession of personal farms and the creation of new collective farms was carried out in the western regions of Ukraine, Belarus, in the Baltic republics, Right-Bank Moldova, annexed in 1939-1940. to the USSR. In these areas, mass collectivization was carried out.
Despite the measures taken, the situation in agriculture remained difficult. Agriculture could not meet the country's needs for food and agricultural raw materials. The socio-economic situation of the rural population also remained difficult. The payment for labor was purely symbolic, the collective farmers were not entitled to pensions, they did not have passports, they were not allowed to leave the village without the permission of the authorities.
The plan of the 4th five-year plan for the development of agriculture was not fulfilled. persistent problems in agriculture remained fodder, grain, meat and dairy. However, the level of agricultural production in 1950 reached the pre-war level. In 1947, the rationing system for food and industrial goods was abolished, and the currency reform was also abolished.
Socio-political and cultural life. In the post-war period, to restore the economy and establish a peaceful life, a huge spiritual tension of the whole society was required. Meanwhile, the creative and scientific intelligentsia, by their nature tending to expand their creative contacts, hoped for the liberalization of life, the weakening of strict party-state control, and pinned their hopes on the development and strengthening of cultural contacts with the United States and Western countries.
But the international situation immediately after the war changed dramatically. Instead of cooperation in the relations between the former allies in the anti-Hitler coalition, a confrontation began. The intelligentsia, however, still hoped for greater cooperation with the West. The leadership of the USSR set a course for "tightening the screws" against the intelligentsia. In 1946-1948. Several resolutions of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks on cultural issues were adopted. In March 1946, the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks adopted a resolution "On the magazines" Zvezda "and" Leningrad ", in which the work of the writers M. Zoshchenko and A. Akhmatova was criticized. At the Organizing Bureau of the Central Committee, where the issue of these magazines was discussed, JV Stalin declared that a journal in the USSR is not a “private enterprise” and has no right to adapt to the tastes of people “who do not want to recognize our system.” The work of other theater, film and music figures was subjected to the same criticism.
In 1949, a broad campaign began in society against cosmopolitanism and "groveling before the West." "Rootless cosmopolitans" were discovered in many cities, the disclosure of creative pseudonyms became widespread.
The authorities began to explain the difficulties of post-war development, disruptions in certain types of production by the "wrecking" of the technical intelligentsia. Thus, "sabotage" was discovered in the production of aviation equipment ("The Case of Shakhurin, Novikov and others), the automotive industry ("On hostile elements at the ZIS"), in the Moscow healthcare system ("On the situation in the MGB and on sabotage in medical business" The “doctors' case” (1952-1953) received a great response. A group of well-known doctors, most of whom were of Jewish nationality, were accused of poisoning and accelerating the death of people close to I.V. Stalin - A.A. Zhdanov, A. S. Shcherbakov, and also, even before the war, M. Gorky and others. After the death of I. V. Stalin, most of them were released. organization was accused of creating an anti-party group and carrying out wrecking work.Among them were A. A. Kuznetsov - Secretary of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks, M. N. Rodionov - Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the RSFSR.
In 1952, the 19th Congress of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks took place, at which I.V. Stalin. At the congress, it was decided to rename the CPSU (b) into the CPSU (Communist Party Soviet Union).
On March 5, 1953, I.V. died. Stalin, whose death was received differently by the Soviet people.
65)Socio-political and cultural life
Post-war ideological campaigns and repression
During the war and immediately after it, the intelligentsia, primarily scientific and creative, hoped for the liberalization of public life, the weakening of the rigid party-state control. However, the international situation soon after the war changed dramatically. The Cold War has begun. Instead of cooperation, there was confrontation. The leadership of the USSR headed for the immediate "tightening the screws" against the intelligentsia, which had somewhat weakened in the last years of the war. In 1946-1948. Several resolutions of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks on cultural issues were adopted. We started with the Leningraders. The March 1946 decree “On the magazines Zvezda and Leningrad” subjected the work of M. Zoshchenko and A. Akhmatova to merciless criticism. At the Orgburo of the Central Committee, where this issue was discussed, I.V. Stalin declared that the magazine in the USSR "is not a private enterprise", it has no right to adapt to the tastes of people "who do not want to recognize our system." The main ideologist of the country at that time, A.A. Zhdanov, speaking in Leningrad with an explanation of the decision, called Zoshchenko a “vulgar”, “non-Soviet writer”. After the defeat of the Leningrad writers, they took up theaters, cinema, and music. The resolutions of the Central Committee of the party “On the repertoire of drama theaters and measures to improve it”, “On the film “Big Life”, “On Muradeli’s opera “Great Friendship”, etc. were adopted accordingly.
Science was also subjected to ideological destruction. The development of agriculture was negatively affected by the position of a group of administrative scientists headed by academician T.D. Lysenko, who took a monopoly position in the management of agricultural science. Her position was consolidated in the decisions of the notorious session of the VASKhNIL (Academy of Agricultural Sciences) held in August 1948. The session dealt a heavy blow to genetics, the key science of modern natural science. Lysenko's views were recognized as the only true in biology. They were called "Michurin's doctrine." Classical genetics was recognized as a reactionary trend in biological science.
Attacks also began against the core of theoretical physics of the 20th century - quantum theory and the theory of relativity. The latter was declared "reactionary Einsteinianism". Cybernetics was called reactionary pseudoscience. Philosophers have argued that the US imperialists need it to foment a third world war.
Spiritual terror was accompanied by physical terror, which was confirmed by the "Leningrad case" (1949-1951) and the "doctors' case" (1952-1953). Formally, the “Leningrad case” was started in January 1949 after an anonymous letter received by the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks about the rigging of the election results of the secretaries of the Leningrad Regional Committee and the City Party Committee. It ended with the removal from work of more than 2 thousand leaders who had ever worked in Leningrad, and the execution of over 200 of them. They were accused of trying to destroy the USSR by pitting Russia against the Union and Leningrad against Moscow.
In recent years, two opposing courses were closely intertwined in Soviet society: the course towards the actual strengthening of the repressive role of the state and the course towards the formal democratization of the political system. The latter appeared in the following forms. In the autumn of 1945, immediately after the defeat of militarist Japan, the state of emergency was ended in the USSR and the State Defense Committee, an extra-constitutional body of power that concentrated dictatorial powers in its hands, was abolished. In 1946-1948. re-elections of councils at all levels were held and the deputy corps, formed back in 1937-1939, was renewed. The first session of the USSR Supreme Council of the new, second convocation was held in March 1946. It approved the 4th Five-Year Plan, adopted a law on the transformation of the Council of People's Commissars into the Council of Ministers of the USSR. Finally, in 1949-1952. resumed after a long break congresses of public and socio-political organizations of the USSR. Thus, in 1949, the 10th Congress of Trade Unions and the 11th Congress of the Komsomol were held (17 and 13 years later, respectively, after the previous ones). And in 1952, the 19th Party Congress was held, the last congress attended by I.V. Stalin. The congress decided to rename the CPSU(b) into the CPSU.
Death of Stalin. power struggle
On March 5, 1953, I.V. Stalin died. Millions of Soviet people mourned this death, while other millions associated hopes for a better life with this event. Both were separated not only by different feelings, but often by barbed wire numerous concentration camps. By this time, according to N.S. Khrushchev, there were about 10 million people in concentration camps and exile. With the death of Stalin, a difficult, heroic and bloody page in the history of Soviet society ended. A few years later, recalling his front-line ally and political enemy, W. Churchill called Stalin an Eastern tyrant and a great politician who "took Russia with a bast shoe, and left it with atomic weapons."
After the funeral of I.V. Stalin (he was buried in a mausoleum next to V.I. Lenin), the top leadership of the state redistributed duties: K.E. Voroshilov was elected head of state, G.M. Malenkov was approved as head of government, Minister of Defense - N .A. Bulganin, Minister of the United Ministry of Internal Affairs (which included the Ministry of State Security) - L.P. Beria. The post of party leader remained vacant. In fact, all power in the country was concentrated in the hands of Beria and Malenkov.
At the initiative of Beria, the "case of doctors" of the Kremlin hospital, accused of trying to kill the leaders of the party, state, and the international communist movement, was terminated. He also insisted on depriving the Central Committee of the party of the right to manage the country's economy, limiting it only to political activities.
In the summer of 1953, returning from Berlin, where he led the suppression of the anti-Soviet uprising, and offering to refuse support for the GDR, agreeing to its unification with the FRG, Beria was arrested. The initiators of this extremely dangerous action were the secretary of the Central Committee of the CPSU N.S. Khrushchev and the Minister of Defense N.A. Bulganin. The capture group of the all-powerful Beria, which consisted of generals and officers of the Moscow Air Defense District, was led by Bulganin's deputy Marshal G.K. Zhukov. In December 1953, a closed trial and execution of Beria and his closest associates took place. They were accused of organizing mass repressions during the years of Stalin's life and preparing a coup d'état after his death. In the history of the Soviet state, this was the last major trial of "enemies of the people" in which persons of such a high rank were held.
66) Complication of the international situation. The collapse of the anti-Hitler coalition
After the defeat of Germany and Japan, the geopolitical situation in the world began to change dramatically. Two centers of attraction and confrontation arose - the USSR and the USA, around which military-political blocs began to be created and plans for a new war were developed. The USSR emerged from the Second World War as a recognized great power that played a key role in the defeat of German fascism and Japanese militarism. In the United Nations Security Council, established in 1945, the USSR became one of the five permanent members along with the USA, Great Britain, France and China. The results of World War II predetermined the course of world development for decades. There have been huge changes in the world. The defeat of German fascism and Japanese militarism meant the victory of humanism, universal values, the strengthening of the positions of democratic, peace-loving forces in different regions the globe. During the Nuremberg Trial (1945-1946) over the main Nazi war criminals, the essence of German fascism, its plans for the destruction of entire states and peoples, were exposed, for the first time in history, aggression was recognized as the gravest crime against humanity.
Changes in the post-war world were contradictory. The anti-Hitler coalition quickly broke up, and the cold war came to replace the common anti-fascist front. The anti-colonial, national liberation movement faced a powerful confrontation between the forces of neo-colonialism. The objectively overdue process of democratization was under the powerful pressure of Soviet totalitarianism and American hegemonism.
The international situation in the post-war period was determined by the beginning cold war.
Causes of the Cold War
After the end of the bloodiest war in the history of mankind - the Second World War, where the USSR became the winner, the prerequisites were created for the emergence of a new confrontation between the West and the East, between the USSR and the USA. The main reasons for the emergence of this confrontation, known as the "cold war", were the ideological contradictions between the capitalist model of society, characteristic of the United States, and the socialist model that existed in the USSR. Each of the two superpowers wanted to see itself at the head of the entire world community and equip life, following its ideological principles. In addition, the Soviet Union after the Second World War established its dominance in the countries of Eastern Europe, where communist ideology reigned. As a result, the United States, along with Great Britain, was frightened by the possibility that the USSR could become a world leader and establish its dominance, both in the political and economic spheres of life. At the same time, one of the main tasks for the United States of America was to pay close attention to the policy of the USSR in the countries of Western Europe in order to prevent socialist revolutions in this territory. America did not like communist ideology at all, and it was the Soviet Union that stood in its way to world domination. After all, America got rich during the Second World War, it needed to sell its products somewhere, so the countries of Western Europe, destroyed during the hostilities, needed to be restored, which was suggested by the US government. But on the condition that the rulers - the communists in these countries will be removed from power. In short, the Cold War was a new kind of competition for world domination.
Start of the Cold War
The beginning of the Cold War was marked by the speech of the English ruler Churchill, delivered in Fulton in March 1946. The US government's top priority was to achieve complete military superiority of the Americans over the Russians. The US began to implement its policy already in 1947 by introducing a whole system of restrictive and prohibitive measures for the USSR in the financial and trade spheres. In short, America wanted to defeat the Soviet Union economically.
The course of the cold war
The most culminating moments of the confrontation were 1949-50, when the North Atlantic Treaty was signed, the war with Korea took place, at the same time the first atomic bomb of Soviet origin was tested. And with the victory of Mao Zedong, rather strong diplomatic relations between the USSR and China were established, they were united by a common hostile attitude towards America and its policies. The Caribbean crisis of 1962 proved that the military power of the two world superpowers, the USSR and the USA, is so great that if there is a threat of a new war, there will be no losing side, and it is worth considering what will happen to ordinary people and the planet as a whole. As a result, since the beginning of the 1970s, the Cold War has entered the stage of normalizing relations. A crisis erupted in the United States due to high material costs, but the USSR did not tempt fate, but made concessions. A nuclear arms reduction treaty called START II was signed. The year 1979 once again proved that the Cold War was not yet over: the Soviet government sent troops into the territory of Afghanistan, whose inhabitants put up fierce resistance to the Russian army. And only in April 1989 the last Russian soldier left this unconquered country.
End and results of the Cold War
In 1988-89, the process of “perestroika” began in the USSR, the Berlin Wall fell, and soon the socialist camp disintegrated. And the USSR did not even begin to claim any influence in the countries of the third world. By 1990, the Cold War was over. It was she who contributed to the strengthening totalitarian regime in USSR. The arms race also led to scientific discoveries: nuclear physics began to develop more intensively, space research acquired a wider scope.
Consequences of the Cold War
The 20th century has ended, more than ten years have passed in the new millennium. The Soviet Union no longer exists, and the countries of the West have also changed ... But as soon as the once weak Russia rose from its knees, gained strength and confidence on the world stage, the United States and its allies again imagine the “ghost of communism”. And it remains to be hoped that the politicians of the leading countries will not return to the policy of the Cold War, since, in the end, everyone will suffer from it ...
67) socio-economic development of the ussr in the mid-1950s the first half of the 1960s
The most important problem of this period was the insufficient production of agricultural products. The industry had low productivity, insufficient mechanization, and the collective farmers had no incentives to work. The government began to take measures to reorganize agriculture. In August 1953, with the adoption of a new budget, subsidies for the production of goods in the food industry increased. At the September Plenum of the Central Committee in 1953, a decision was made to raise purchase prices, write off debts of collective farms and reduce taxes. The February Plenum of the Central Committee decided to start agricultural production in the semi-arid zone in the east of the country - the Trans-Volga region, Kazakhstan, Siberia, Altai and the Lower Urals. To this end, in 1954, 300,000 volunteers went to the development of virgin lands. It was planned to put into circulation 42 million hectares of arable land and by the end of 1960 to increase grain production by 40%. Initially low yields fell over time, the land was depleted and funds were needed for land reclamation, agronomic activities, infrastructure development, etc. The soil died from erosion and weeds. Nevertheless, due to the development of vast areas, it was possible to increase the gross harvest of grain crops. In three years, agricultural production increased by 25%. After Khrushchev's visit to the United States, the Plenum of the Central Committee in 1955 decided to make corn a major crop. 18 million hectares were sown in areas not suitable for this production. The next stage of the reorganization of agriculture began in May 1957, when Khrushchev put forward the slogan "Catch up and overtake America!" . In 1957 MTS were dissolved. As a result, collective farms received equipment, but were left without a repair base. This led to a reduction in the fleet of agricultural machines and the withdrawal of significant funds from the collective farms. The second reform aimed to enlarge the collective farms and create associations that would promote the industrialization of agriculture. Farm managers sought to fulfill their obligations to the state by infringing on the interests of ordinary collective farmers (household plots were reduced, personal cattle were forcibly taken to collective farms). Much attention was paid to the development of heavy industry and defense. As a result, the situation in the production of consumer goods was missed, and a deficit appeared in this area. In 1954, the 11th Trade Union Congress revealed serious shortcomings in the management of industry and the condition of the workers. Production meetings were revived, control over overtime work, and incentive measures were strengthened. Administration officials teamed up with experts. In 1957, to facilitate interaction between industries, the industrial ministries were replaced by economic councils. However, the "administrative fever" did not give positive results, the pace of the country's economic development was declining. In general, the standard of living in the country has risen. To this end, the state has taken a number of measures. Wages increased regularly. The law on pensions was adopted, the working week was shortened, and the length of maternity leave was extended. The practice of imposing purchases of compulsory state loans has ceased. All types of tuition fees have been abolished. Mass housing construction began. At the turn of the 50-60s. serious miscalculations were made in agrarian policy and the economy. The manufacturing sector was destructured by rash reforms and storming. Since 1963, the government was forced to make regular purchases of grain abroad. They tried to rectify the crisis by withdrawing funds from the population by raising retail prices and lowering tariff rates for production. This led to social tension and spontaneous actions of workers (for example, in Novocherkassk, 1962)
68)20 Congress of the CPSU and Khrushchev's report
The 20th Congress of the CPSU was held in 1956, February 14-25. At this Congress, those assessments that had previously been given to Stalin's policy were revised. Stalin's personality cult was also condemned. One of the speakers was Nikita Sergeevich Khrushchev. The report "On the cult of personality and its consequences" was presented on February 25 at a closed morning session. It criticized the political repressions of the 1930s, as well as the 1950s, and all the blame for the events of those years was placed personally on Stalin.
The report "On the cult of personality and its consequences" made a strong impression on the listeners. The delegations of France and Italy, as well as the delegations of the communist states, were acquainted with it. It should be noted that the report was accepted ambiguously.
English translation published in the summer of 1956 in the USA. Citizens of the USSR were able to get acquainted with it only in 1989. But, due to the fact that rumors about the report made on the last day of the congress still leaked outside the Kremlin offices, a decree was issued on June 30 "On overcoming the cult of personality and its consequences", which explained the position of the Central Committee.
The 20th Congress of the CPSU and Khrushchev's report led to a split in public opinion. Some citizens of the country perceived it as a symbol of the beginning of democratic changes. The other part reacted negatively. This could not but alarm the ruling elite and, as a result, led to the termination of the discussion of the problem of Stalinist repressions.
Perestroika" in the social and political life of the USSR
The concept of "perestroika" can be defined as an attempt to preserve administrative-command socialism, giving it elements of democracy and market relations, without affecting the fundamental foundations of the political system. Perestroika had serious prerequisites. Stagnation in the economy, the growing scientific and technological backwardness from the West, failures in the social sphere have caused millions of people and some leaders to realize the need for change. Its other prerequisite was the political crisis, expressed in the gradual disintegration of the state apparatus, in its unreasonableness to ensure economic progress, in the frank merging of part of the party-state nomenclature with the businessmen of the shadow economy and crime, which led to the formation in the mid-80s of stable mafia groups, especially in the union republics. Apathy and stagnation in the spiritual sphere of society pushed for change. It was obvious that without changes it was impossible to raise the activity of the people.
Reforming the political system.
a) The change in the leadership of the CPSU and the “personnel revolution” of M.S. Gorbachev.
March 11, 1985 Extraordinary Plenum of the Central Committee of the CPSU elected General Secretary Party of 54-year-old Mikhail Sergeevich Gorbachev, whose life path did not differ from the path of his predecessors.
The very fact of renewal and especially rejuvenation of the party leadership was a very significant event. To replace the infirm elders in the Politburo, a group of relatively young leaders began to form, albeit with traditional experience in apparatus Komsomol-party work.
At the plenum of the Central Committee in April 1985. the task of achieving a qualitatively new state of Soviet society was put forward. This event is considered to be the starting point of perestroika:
The first stage - since April 1985. until the end of 1986
The second stage - from January 1987. to April 1988
The third stage - since April 1988. to March 1990
The fourth stage - since March 1990. to August 1991
Despite all the conventions of such a periodization, it allows us to trace the dynamics of the perestroika process, the main stages of the political struggle, participation in the socio-political life of the broad masses of the people.
The reforms began with the personnel renewal of the "top of power" and management. Correlating with the traditions of the political leadership of the party and the state, the mentality of specific people included in this leadership, M. Gorbachev began personnel reshuffles. He drew personnel from the party nomenklatura. The process of personnel reshuffles proceeded relatively without conflict, which was facilitated by the age composition of the Politburo, in which M.S. Gorbachev became General Secretary of the Central Committee of the CPSU. In March 1986, when this Politburo was being formed, there were only four people in it from the previous composition of the same body, elected five years ago. Almost every second member of the previous Politburo by the spring of 1986. died, the rest were sent to "a well-deserved rest. The process of personnel renewal in the "tops of power" was completed in 1988. By the beginning of 1987 70% of the members of the Politburo were replaced. As the second person in the secretariat, E.K. Ligachev, N.I. Ryzhkov, a specialist with a higher technical education, was appointed Chairman of the Council of Ministers; Secretary of the Sverdlovsk regional party committee B.N. was invited from the Urals to Moscow. Yeltsin, who soon became the first secretary of the Moscow City Party Committee.
Throughout 1986. 60% of the secretaries of the regional party organizations were replaced, 40% of the members of the Central Committee of the CPSU, who received their posts under L.I. Brezhnev, at the level of city committees and district committees, the staff was updated by 70%.
By 1992 only M. Gorbachev was the next link between the old and the new nomenklatura at the pinnacle of power.
b) The policy of democratization and glasnost in the light of the decisions of the XIX All-Union Conference.
In 1988 (June-July) at the XIX All-Union Conference of the CPSU for the first time in the years of Soviet power, the question of the need for a deep reform of the political system was raised. Unusual preparations for this forum by previous standards, the relatively democratic nature of the election of its delegates, and broad support for the course of reforming society contributed to the growth of faith in the party's ability to lead the transformation. Almost all the prominent reformers (the so-called foremen of perestroika) then were in the ranks of the CPSU, and some of those who were not (A.A. Sobchak, S.V. Stankevich and others) joined it.
The decisions of the conference included:
creation of the rule of law
development of parliamentarism within the Soviets
an end to the replacement of economic and state bodies by the CPSU.
All these transformations had to be carried out in the presence of three mandatory elements:
Democratization
Glasnost
Pluralism of opinions.
The rule of law, as part of the reform of the legal system, should be based on the rule of law, the actions of the legislative, executive and judicial authorities (but under the control of the fourth force - the CPSU). From here - fundamental principle new state - "everything that is not prohibited by law is allowed."
In December 1988 The Supreme Soviet of the Soviet Socialist Republic amended the current Constitution of the country. The congress of people's deputies became the supreme body of power, from which a permanent parliament was formed - the Supreme Council, consisting of two chambers (the Council of the Union and the Council of Nationalities).
The policy of glasnost played an important role in the implementation of reforms and the involvement of broad sections of the working people in political life. It began in revealing the truth about the crimes of the Stalinist period, without exposing which it was impossible to break the totalitarian regime.
A special manifestation of democracy in Soviet society was not only the opportunity to express one's opinion, the publication of previously banned literature, the return of citizenship to former Soviet dissidents and human rights activists, but also the introduction of freedom of religion.
Political pluralism also affected the CPSU, where as many as five directions stood out, but on the whole the party was still following its General Secretary.
c) Formation of a multi-party system and attempts to reform the CPSU.
The first to appear in the years of perestroika were liberal parties (the Democratic Union, the Christian Democratic Union of Russia, the Russian Christian Democratic Party, the Islamic Renaissance Party, the Democratic Party, the Liberal Democratic Party, etc.).
The political forces of the socialist direction for a long time were represented only by the CPSU and the platforms operating within its framework (Democratic platform, Marxist platform, etc.). But in May 1989 the creation of the Social Democratic Association was proclaimed, and on its basis in May 1990 - the Social Democratic Party of Russia. In 1991 the People's Party of Free Russia, the Socialist Party of Workers, the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks, the Russian Communist Workers' Party, and others are formed.
National-patriotic parties and movements are being formed. May 1990 operating since 1924 was legalized. Orthodox Russian-monarchical order-union. Back in 1987 the national-patriotic front "Memory" is formed, and in 1991. - Russian All-People's Union.
During the period of perestroika, parties of socialist orientation found themselves in a truly crisis state. For them, the main problem was to defend their ideological and theoretical foundations. Not everyone managed to do it.
The collapse of the CPSU began, on the ruins of which in the fall of 1991. - in the winter of 1992. up to a dozen different parties of a communist orientation arose. Interestingly, after the collapse of the CPSU, a deep crisis hit the liberals as well. Most of the parties of a liberal orientation were guided by a long and uncompromising struggle with the regime of the ruling party. But when the CPSU collapsed, they were not ready to offer their own programs to get out of the crisis that hit the country. Some of them went into opposition to the government, which has adopted a course of radical market reforms. Others declared their support for the reform, but did not provide practical support to the government. Therefore, with the beginning of the implementation of the government program of transition to the market, a new regrouping of political forces began. In any case, at the center of the political struggle of the period of perestroika were parties of a communist orientation and parties of a liberal direction. If the supporters of the former called for the predominant development of public, state ownership of collectivist forms of social relations, then the liberals advocated the privatization of property, a system of full-fledged parliamentary democracy, and a real transition to a market economy.
d) Reform of public administration bodies.
Innovations in the economic sphere occurred simultaneously with the decentralization of its management.
Within five years, several reductions and transformations of management structures were made. So, in November 1985. Six agricultural departments were liquidated and the State Agroprom of the USSR was established. April 1989 it was abolished, some of its functions were taken over by the State Commission of the Council of Ministers of the USSR for Food and Procurement. In 1991 it was liquidated and on its basis the Ministry of Agriculture of the USSR was formed. In August 1986 The Ministry of Construction of the USSR was "rationed" - four ministries were created on its basis, in charge of construction in different regions of the USSR. In 1989 they were abolished.
The total of the first two years of economic reforms turned out to be bad.
From this moment begins the second stage of economic reforms (1987-1990). It is characterized by the curtailment of the planned economy, the enterprise received a fairly broad independence and was freed from the petty tutelage of higher departments (union and republican ministries, Gosplan, Gossnab of the USSR).
In 1990 new economic entities begin to emerge. The process of turning some ministries into joint-stock companies is gaining momentum. Shareholders are not only state-owned enterprises, but also individuals. At the same time, the network of some state banks is being abolished and a system of commercial banks is being formed. On the basis of Gossnab subdivisions, the Russian Commodity Raw Materials Exchange is being formed, and many profitable industries are being privatized.
However, dissatisfaction with these transformations was brewing in society, because. no administrative changes in management have eliminated the shortage of food products.
To compensate for the decline in the authority of power, it was decided to introduce the post of President. The first President of the USSR in March 1990. M.S. Gorbachev was elected. But the mechanical introduction of the presidency while maintaining the Soviets, which combined legislative and executive functions, led not to the separation of the branches of power, but to their conflict.
Attitude towards religion
In the context of democratic transformations, there have been changes in the relationship between church and state. Several meetings were held with M.S. Gorbachev with the Patriarch of the Russian Orthodox Church Pimen and representatives of other religious denominations. In 1988 anniversary celebrations were held in connection with the 1000th anniversary of the Baptism of Russia. New religious communities were registered, spiritual educational institutions were opened, and the circulation of published religious literature increased.
The religious buildings that had been taken from them earlier were returned to the believers. The authorities gave permission for the construction of new temples. Church leaders were given the opportunity, along with all citizens, to participate in public life. Several prominent church hierarchs were elected deputies to the country's Supreme Soviet.
New legislation was developed and approved. Its appearance was preceded by a discussion in the pages of the periodical press on the question of how state-church relations should be built. New law"On freedom of conscience" fixed the course towards the liberalization of the attitude of the state towards religion.
National relations and international processes.
a) Exacerbation of interethnic conflicts.
With the beginning of perestroika, interethnic relations in the USSR sharply worsened.
In the Union republics, the national movement rose to its full height, and parties were formed that advocated secession from the USSR. Initially, they acted under the slogans of the struggle for perestroika, reforms and the interests of the people. Their demands were about culture, language, democracy and freedom. But gradually the national forces took a course towards achieving sovereignty and independence.
The traditional unwillingness of the Union Center to take into account the interests and needs of the national republics and regions led to the growth of militant nationalism and separatist tendencies.
b) "Parade of sovereignties".
During the period 1989-1990. the "parade of sovereignties" of the Union republics began, trying to independently find a way out of the deepening crisis.
Elections of their own authorities are taking place in the republics, which have taken a decisive course towards self-determination and independence, statements from the Center about the supremacy of republican laws over union ones, laws were adopted on the state language, the creation of their own armies, their own currency. This unconstitutional and spontaneous declaration of independence from the Center in the conditions of the incapacity of the allied authorities in the national question only increased internal instability and shook the foundations of the Soviet Union, which, in the end, led to its collapse.
c) Formation of an independent policy of the RSFSR (spring 1990-summer 1991)
May 1990 Despite the efforts of the central authorities and the leadership of the CPSU, Yeltsin B.N., who spoke out against the inconsistent leadership of the country for the radicalization of reforms and the abolition of the privileges of the nomenklatura, was elected chairman of the Supreme Soviet of the RSFSR. declaration of sovereignty, which proclaimed the priority of republican legislation over the Union. To strengthen his position, Yeltsin achieved a decision to hold elections for the President of Russia. Elections were held on June 12, 1991.
Thus, B.N. became the first president of Russia. Yeltsin.
d) Federal policy of Russia.
The special role of Russia, its government and personally the President of the RSFSR B.N. Yeltsin in the August-September events was not in doubt. Boris Yeltsin demonstratively hurried to take advantage of this. Decrees were issued on the transfer to the jurisdiction of Russia one branch of the economy after another. The Russian leadership did not hide its primary task - as soon as possible "to dismantle the remnants of the unitary imperial structures and create mobile and cheap inter-republican structures." According to the new federal treaty, Russia was proposed to have such a structure in which it would consist of large regional territories, national republics with their own parliaments, laws, and governments.
At the federal level, a bicameral parliament, the President, the federal government and departments were envisaged. The model assumed a combination of a unitary federal leadership with independent, to a very high degree, members of the federation. At the end of 1991 By decision of the session of the Supreme Council of the RSFSR, the republic was renamed. From now on, the RSFSR became known as the Russian Federation with the addition in brackets - (Russia).
The political crisis of August 1991 and its consequences.
Scheduled for August 20, 1991 the signing of the Union Treaty could not but push the supporters of the preservation of the former USSR to take decisive action. The decree of the President of the RSFSR B.N. Yeltsin on departization, according to which the activities of any parties were prohibited in state institutions of the RSFSR. Thus, a blow was dealt to the monopoly position of the CPSU. The ousting of the party nomenklatura from power structures and its replacement by new people from Yeltsin's entourage began.
In the absence of the President of the USSR M.S. Gorbachev, who was on vacation in the Crimea, on August 19, 1991. some representatives of the top leadership of the USSR made an attempt to disrupt the upcoming signing of a new Union Treaty. The State Committee for the State of Emergency (GKChP) was formed. It included: Vice-President of the USSR G.I. Yanaev, Prime Minister of the USSR V.S. Pavlov, Minister of Defense D.T. Yazov, Chairman of the KGB of the USSR V.A. Kryuchkov, Minister of Internal Affairs B.K. Pugo etc.
Vice President of the USSR G.I. Yanaev issued a decree on assuming the office of the President of the USSR due to the "illness" of M.S. Gorbachev. The GKChP announced the introduction of a state of emergency in certain regions of the country, the disbandment of those power structures that were formed contrary to the current Constitution of the USSR of 1977, suspended the activities of political parties and movements in opposition to the CPSU, banned rallies and demonstrations for the period of the state of emergency, established control over the media . Troops were sent to Moscow.
Resistance to the actions of the State Emergency Committee was led by the leaders of Russia: President B.N. Yeltsin, head of government I.S. Silantiev, First Deputy Chairman of the Supreme Council of the RSFSR A.V. Rutskaya, who, in the event of a victory of the putschists, were deprived of their power in the republic.
The actions of the GKChP were declared as an illegal anti-constitutional coup (however, the structures on behalf of which the functionaries of the RSFSR acted were not represented in the Constitution of the USSR of 1977) and its decisions were also declared illegal. At the call of Yeltsin, thousands of Muscovites took up defensive positions around the house of the Russian Government. The troops brought into the capital did not take any action. Elite units of the KGB abstained from any decisive action in favor of the putschists. Not without tragic bloodshed, in which some parts of the troops were to blame, the commanders of which decided to move to defend the White House without coordinating their actions with the leaders of its defense. The putschists were at a loss, not expecting such a turn of events. Soon they were arrested.
"Liberation" of the President of the USSR M.S. Gorbachev from his "imprisonment" at the dacha in Foros allowed us to consider that his career as a politician was over. His influence as the President of the USSR fell sharply, which led to the rapid abolition of the central power structures. Shortly after the failure of the plot, eight Soviet republics declared their independence. Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, previously recognized by the international community, were recognized by the USSR as independent sovereign states.
The August-September events were immediately regarded in hot pursuit from two fundamentally different positions.
One, which became official, boiled down to the fact that the events of August 19-21 were a putsch, an unconstitutional attempt to seize power by reactionary forces opposed to the democratic renewal of society, in favor of a return to a totalitarian system. According to this point of view, the President of the USSR was indeed forcibly isolated in Foros, the usurpers of power intended to behead the Russian leadership, and were ready to shed people's blood. The coup failed, thanks to the active opposition of the Russian government, which led the popular resistance.
According to the second position, events are sharply divided into two stages:
the first is August 19-21: an unsuccessful "palace" coup with an attempt to give it a soft constitutional form, undertaken by the "Soviet leadership" with the tacit half-consent of the President of the USSR. His isolation in Foros was purely conditional. It seemed to be taken out of the game for a while, so that emergency measures would not compromise its “democratic image” in the eyes of the world community. In case of success of the enterprise of the “gekachepists”, he could well return to the presidency (as G.I. Yanaev spoke about at a press conference). Namely, the bet on soft constitutional forms explains many of the troubles in the actions or inaction of the State Emergency Committee. That is why they first declared a state of emergency, and then brought in troops (and not vice versa, which serious putschists do), because they were not going to use them, except as an intimidation, and therefore B.N. Yeltsin and other Russian leaders were not arrested.
At this first stage, they were immediately defeated, running into unexpected sharp resistance from Yeltsin, who did not accept the proposed "rules of the game", declaring the top of the legitimate union government to be conspirators and usurpers. He went to the aggravation and easily won. At this point in the "palace coup" the Democrats won;
in September the second stage began. It is already characterized as a genuine coup d'état, because what happened at the 5th Extraordinary Congress of People's Deputies of the USSR, and led to a change in the socio-political system, gave impetus to the collapse of the USSR.
So, in the August-September events, in the protracted confrontation between Russia and the Union, Russia won. The Union began to rapidly "fall apart". The CPSU and the Communist Party of the RSFSR, whose activities were suspended, resignedly left the political scene. So far there have been no disagreements in the camp of the winners: President B.N. Yeltsin and Vice-President A.V. Rutskoi, acting. Chairman of the Supreme Council R.I. Khasbulatov at all celebrations stood side by side shoulder to shoulder. It was their common victory. Their joint triumph, the finest hour of Russia's democratic leaders.
Legitimization of the collapse of the USSR and its assessment.
After the signing of the Treaty on the Economic Community (10/18/1991), the discussion of the issue of political union also revived.
The position of the Russian parliament, especially its chairman R.I. Khasbulatov, became more and more definite. It was based on the principle of maintaining a single Russian state: there should not be any independent states on the territory of the RSFSR.
The fundamental provisions of the future statehood were decided by a narrow circle of leaders:
On November 14, a meeting of the State Council was held in Novo-Ogaryovo, at which the leaders of seven sovereign states spoke in favor of a single confederal democratic state. The state was preserved - the Union of sovereign states - as a subject of international law. However, the intended initialing of the text did not take place;
On December 8, in a secluded residence near Minsk, in Belovezhskaya Pushcha, the leaders of three republics met: Russia, Ukraine, Belarus. They signed an agreement according to which the USSR, as a "subject of international law", was declared "ceased to exist". The creation of the Commonwealth of Independent States was announced.
The model of state structure chosen in Minsk left no room for the Center, and did not provide for any federal government bodies at all.
The Belovezhskaya agreements produced the effect of an exploding bomb. As M.S. Gorbachev, the three leaders of the republics "met in the forest and "closed" the Soviet Union."
The theme of the "conspiratorial" nature of the action was subsequently described by the former Chairman of the Council of the Union of the USSR Armed Forces K.D. Lubenchenko: "a brilliant covert and unexpected political operation was completed, just like in wartime."
The Supreme Soviets of Russia, Ukraine and Belarus ratified the Belovezhskaya agreements, thereby giving them a more legitimate character. In December, other republics joined the Commonwealth, except for the Baltic republics and Georgia (in 1994 it joined the CIS). At the end of 1991 The RSFSR was renamed into the Russian Federation (Russia).
December 25, 1991 M.S. Gorbachev resigned his presidency in connection with the disappearance of the state itself. This day will be the last in the existence of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.
The dramatic collapse of a huge and powerful state was commented on in different ways.
Some, which is a unitary power in its essence, subjugated single center economically, spiritually, ethnically heterogeneous republics, formally sovereign, but practically devoid of independence, in conditions where not all of them entered the Union voluntarily, was initially doomed to inevitable death.
Others, led to a sad result by a short-sighted, incompetent, ambitious and mercenary policy, primarily of the country's ruling elite, the struggle for power among leaders, in parties and movements, during which the most important state and socio-economic interests and values were sacrificed.
Thus, perestroika, conceived and carried out by some of the party and state leaders with the aim of democratic changes in all spheres of society, has ended. Its main result was the collapse of the once mighty multinational state and the end of the Soviet period in the history of the Fatherland.
69) The main tasks of the USSR in the international arena in 1956-1964. were: the speedy reduction of the military threat and the end of the Cold War, the expansion of international relations, the strengthening of the influence of the USSR in the world as a whole. This could be achieved only through the implementation of a flexible and dynamic foreign policy based on a powerful economic and military potential (primarily nuclear). The reformist course of the Soviet leadership headed by Khrushchev was reflected in the new foreign policy doctrine promulgated from the rostrum of the 20th Congress of the CPSU in February 1956. Its main provisions were: a return to the "Leninist principles of the policy of peaceful coexistence of states with different social social systems, the possibility of creating conditions for the prevention of wars in the modern era. The variety of forms of transition of various countries to socialism and the multivariance of the ways of its construction were also recognized. In addition, the need was recognized, based on the principles of "proletarian internationalism", to provide comprehensive assistance to both the countries of the socialist camp and the world communist and national liberation movement. As the main direction in ensuring peace throughout the world, Khrushchev proposed creating a system of collective security in Europe, and then in Asia, as well as starting immediate disarmament. Wishing to demonstrate the seriousness of these intentions, the Soviet government went for a unilateral reduction in the Armed Forces: from August 1955 it was decided to reduce them by 640 thousand people, and from May 1956 by another 1 million 200 thousand people. Significant reductions in their armies were carried out by other countries of the socialist camp. In 1957, the USSR submitted proposals to the UN to suspend nuclear weapons tests and to undertake obligations to renounce the use of atomic and hydrogen weapons, as well as the simultaneous reduction of the armed forces of the USSR, the USA and China to 2.5 million, and then "to 1.5 million people. Finally, the USSR proposed to eliminate military bases on the territories of foreign states. In 1958, the Soviet government in unilaterally declared a moratorium on nuclear testing, turned the axis to the parliaments of all countries of the world to support this initiative. Western countries were skeptical about the Soviet proposals and put forward such conditions as the development of confidence-building measures and control over the reduction of conventional and nuclear potentials of opposing military-political groups. Khrushchev's speech in the autumn of 1959 at the UN General Assembly on the problem of general disarmament caused a great resonance in the world. In his speech, the leader of the Soviet state proposed a plan for the complete elimination of national armies and navies, leaving the states with only police forces. This first visit of the leader of the USSR to the USA sharply increased the prestige and prestige of our country in the international arena and contributed to the easing of tension in Soviet-American relations. The major reductions in the Armed Forces of the USSR, carried out in 1955-1960, made it possible to reduce the Soviet Army by almost 4 million people and bring its strength to 2.5 million. However, it was not possible to break the vicious circle of the arms race in the 1950s .
Caribbean crisis
The first image of Soviet missiles in Cuba, received by the Americans.
The Caribbean Crisis is an extremely tense confrontation between the Soviet Union and the United States regarding the deployment of nuclear missiles by the Soviet Union in Cuba in October 1962. The Cubans call it the October Crisis (Spanish Crisis de Octubre), in the United States the name Cuban Missile Crisis is common (eng. Cuban missile crisis).
The crisis was preceded by the 1961 deployment by the United States in Turkey of Jupiter medium-range missiles that directly threatened cities in the western part of the Soviet Union, reaching as far as Moscow and major industrial centers.
The crisis began on October 14, 1962, when a US Air Force U-2 reconnaissance aircraft, during one of its regular overflights of Cuba, discovered Soviet R-12 medium-range missiles in the vicinity of the village of San Cristobal. By decision of US President John F. Kennedy, a special Executive Committee was created to discuss possible solutions to the problem. For some time, the meetings of the executive committee were secret, but on October 22, Kennedy addressed the people, announcing the presence of Soviet "offensive weapons" in Cuba, which immediately began to panic in the United States. A "quarantine" (blockade) of Cuba was introduced.
At first, the Soviet side denied the presence of Soviet nuclear weapons on the island, then assured the Americans of the deterrent nature of the deployment of missiles in Cuba. On October 25, photographs of the missiles were shown at a meeting of the UN Security Council. The executive committee seriously discussed the use of force to solve the problem, and his supporters convinced Kennedy to start a massive bombardment of Cuba as soon as possible. However, another overflight of U-2 showed that several missiles were already installed and ready for launch, and that such actions would inevitably lead to war.
Number and type of US nuclear warheads. 1945-2002.
US President John F. Kennedy offered the Soviet Union to dismantle the installed missiles and deploy ships still en route to Cuba in exchange for US guarantees not to attack Cuba and overthrow the Fidel Castro regime (sometimes it is stated that Kennedy also offered to withdraw American missiles from Turkey, but this demand came from the Soviet leadership). Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the USSR and First Secretary of the Central Committee of the CPSU Nikita Khrushchev agreed, and on October 28, the dismantling of missiles began. The last Soviet missile left Cuba a few weeks later, and on November 20 the blockade of Cuba was lifted.
The Cuban Missile Crisis lasted 13 days. It had an extremely important psychological and historical significance. Humanity for the first time in its history was on the verge of self-destruction. The resolution of the crisis marked a turning point in the Cold War and the beginning of international détente.
70) In the post-war period, the restructuring of Western capitalism on social and humanistic principles continued, after the defeat of fascism, the reformist-democratic trend fully manifested itself. Leaders Western countries realized the need for constant corrective state intervention in the economic and social sphere. The growth of public spending on social purposes, state support for science and technology, capital construction, and infrastructure development stimulated employment and effective consumer demand to the maximum. The concepts of "welfare state", "mass consumer society", "high quality of life" became dominant. The volume of industrial production in the capitalist world in 1948-1973 increased 4.5 times. Real wages from 1950 to 1970 in the USA grew 1.5 times, in Great Britain - 1.6 times, in Italy - 2.1 times, in France - 2.3 times, in Germany - 2, 8 times. In the "golden" years for Western countries, the 60s, the proportion of unemployed fell to 2.5-3% of the economically active population. The growth rate of industrial output in the 1960s was 5.7% compared to 4.9% in the 1950s and 3.9% in the interwar period. In the post-war period, many new, seemingly completely unexpected phenomena appeared. Thus, from the end of the 1950s to the beginning of the 1980s, the growth rates in Germany and Japan ranged from 10 to 20%, that is, they were the highest among developed countries. The "Japanese" and "German miracles" had a lot in common. The most important was: minimizing military spending in these countries that lost the second world war; use of traditional diligence, discipline and high cultural and educational level; the development of not energy and resource-intensive industries, but the production of finished, complex products(cars, complex electronics, ingenious production lines, etc.); expedient redistribution of national income through a system of progressive taxation, in which the upper values were up to 50-80%. Creation and development of international financial structures (World Bank, IMF, IBRD). The process of integration of states in various fields of activity in recent decades has been called globalization. A major result of the cooperation that developed between the countries of the anti-Hitler coalition during the Second World War was the creation in 1945 of the United Nations. By 2006, 192 states were members of the UN. The range of UN activities in the system of international economic relations is very wide and fully reflects the trends of internationalization and globalization of modern economic life. An important aspect of globalization is the increasing integration of world economies, facilitated by the ease of movement of goods and capital across national borders. The international monetary system is a set of monetary relations that have developed on the basis of economic life and the development of the world market. The main components of the world monetary system are: - a certain set of international means of payment, - a currency exchange regime, including exchange rates, convertibility conditions, - regulation of the forms of international payments, - a network of international banking institutions that carry out international payments and credit operations. In 1944, the International Monetary and Financial Conference was held in Bretton Woods (USA), at which it was decided to establish the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD) and the International Monetary Fund (IMF). Both organizations have the status of specialized agencies of the United Nations. The IBRD began operating in 1946 and the IMF in 1947. The purpose of the IBRD is to assist member countries in obtaining long-term loans and credits, as well as guaranteeing private investment. In the first post-war years, the IBRD provided significant loans to the countries of Western Europe for economic recovery. In the future, the main object of the IBRD's activities were developing countries. Since the late 1980s, the IBRD began to provide loans to countries of Eastern Europe . Russia joined the IBRD in 1992. IBRD issues bonds, which are bought by private banks, receiving over 9%. From the collected funds, the IBRD provides loans covering about 30% of the cost of the facility, and the rest must be financed from internal or other sources. IBRD loans are provided for the development of energy, transport, communications and other infrastructure sectors for up to 20 years at a high interest rate, determined by the level of interest rates in the loan capital market. If the initial capital of the bank did not exceed $10 billion, then in 1995 it exceeded $176 billion. 181 states are members of the IBRD. 182 countries are members of the IMF. The Russian Federation has been a member of the IMF since 1992. The goal of the IMF was proclaimed to promote the development of international trade and monetary cooperation by eliminating foreign exchange restrictions, as well as providing foreign exchange loans to equalize balances of payments and establish norms for regulating exchange rates. The capital of the IMF has come close to $300 billion, with the United States, Great Britain, Germany, France and Japan having the greatest influence in accordance with the largest quotas. Quotas are set depending on the level of economic development of the country and its role in the world economy and trade. Since 1944, the Bretton Woods monetary system has been in effect. It provided for the preservation of the functions of world money for gold while simultaneously using national monetary units, primarily the US dollar, as well as the British pound sterling, as international payment and reserve currencies. The obligatory exchange of reserve currencies for gold was established by foreign government agencies and central banks at the official rate - $ 35 per troy ounce - 31.1 g of gold. Mutual equalization and exchange of currencies was envisaged on the basis of currency parities agreed with the IMF in gold and US dollars. Deviation of market exchange rates was allowed no more than 1%. The dollar was in a privileged position. The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) dates back to January 1, 1948. At its core, GATT is a binding treaty between the governments of member countries. Initially, there were 23 of them, and by 1994 their number had reached over 100. The goal of the GATT was proclaimed to provide a predictable international trading environment and trade liberalization in the interests of promoting economic development. GATT performed very important functions: establishing rules binding on governments in the field of international trade and related areas of economic relations; conducting trade negotiations; fulfilling the duties of an international "court" on trade matters. Thanks to the GATT, publicity, non-discrimination, and national treatment of taxes and duties on imported goods have become universally recognized in the system of international economic relations. By 1994, the GATT member countries accounted for over 90% of world trade. The average level of customs duties on goods under the GATT was reduced from 40% to 4%. Thanks to GATT, streamlining began in such important areas as trade in services, the results of creative activity, and foreign investment related to trade. Back in 1982, the USSR established contacts with the Secretariat (in the city of Geneva) and the main countries participating in the agreement. On May 16, 1990, the USSR received observer status in the GATT. The Russian Federation began to participate in some of the working bodies of the GATT, and in June 1993, the Director General of the GATT received an application from the Government of the Russian Federation with a request to join this agreement. We have to talk about GATT in the past tense, since on January 1, 1995, by decision of the Uruguay Round of multilateral negotiations on the legal basis of GATT, the World Trade Organization (WTO) was formed. Any organization that accepts the obligations of the entire package of documents underlying the WTO can become a member of the WTO. At the end of 1996, 130 states became members of the WTO, and another 30 expressed interest in joining it. An important role in the functioning of a complex system of international economic relations is played by structures created under the United Nations (UN). Among them are such UN specialized agencies as the International Maritime Organization (IMO), the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), and the International Labor Organization (ILO). Since 1968, the Commission on the Law of International Trade (UNISTRAL) began to work, the purpose of which is to harmonize and unify the law of international trade. UNISTRAL has developed a number of international legal documents approved by the UN. By 2000, there were over 400 intergovernmental and about 3,000 non-governmental international organizations in the world. International economic organizations can be characterized as organizations created at the interstate, intergovernmental, interministerial levels or created by business and public organizations to coordinate the activities of countries in various spheres of the world economy. The creation of international economic organizations was a product of the growing internationalization of economic life, the globalization of economic processes. Transformation of neo-colonialism and economic globalization. Coordination of efforts in order to achieve concrete results has become an important way for countries that have begun to free themselves from colonial dependence to fight for their place in the system of international economic relations. In 1963, at the 18th session of the UN General Assembly, developing countries for the first time jointly expressed their point of view on international economic problems. In 1964, the name Group of 77 appeared, as 77 states signed the corresponding declaration on trade and development at the UN Geneva Conference. The declaration spoke about the general and special principles of international economic relations: the sovereign equality of states, the acceleration of economic growth and the reduction of the income gap different countries regardless of the political system, about increasing the export earnings of third world countries, etc. Over time, the Group of 77 included 120 states of Asia, Africa and Latin America, as well as the European countries of Malta, Romania, and the SFRY. In 1974, at the initiative of the Group of 77, the VI Special Session of the UN General Assembly adopted the Declaration and Program of Action for the Establishment of a New Economic Order. Along with international organizations whose activities are of global importance, there are many regional organizations. In 1945, the League of Arab States (LAS) was formed. The members of this regional organization are 22 Arab states: Egypt, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Yemen, Libya, etc. The Arab League coordinates the activities of its members in the political, economic, military and other spheres, develops a unified policy of the Arab states on a number of pan-Arab problems. In the Middle East, Arab funds and development banks play a significant role, the purpose of which is to lend to developing countries - oil importers. In 1971-1980, over 100 developing countries received subsidies, but ¾ of the funds were given to the Arab states.
In the post-war period, the restructuring of Western capitalism on social and humanistic principles continued; after the defeat of fascism, the reformist-democratic trend fully manifested itself. The leaders of Western countries have realized the need for constant corrective state intervention in the economic and social sphere. The growth of public spending on social purposes, state support for science and technology, capital construction, and infrastructure development stimulated employment and effective consumer demand to the maximum. The concepts of "welfare state", "mass consumer society", "high quality of life" became dominant. The volume of industrial production in the capitalist world in 1948-1973 increased 4.5 times. Real wages from 1950 to 1970 in the USA grew 1.5 times, in Great Britain - 1.6 times, in Italy - 2.1 times, in France - 2.3 times, in Germany - 2, 8 times. In the "golden" years for Western countries, the 60s, the proportion of unemployed fell to 2.5-3% of the economically active population. The growth rate of industrial output in the 1960s was 5.7% compared to 4.9% in the 1950s and 3.9% in the interwar period. In the post-war period, many new, seemingly completely unexpected phenomena appeared. Thus, from the end of the 1950s to the beginning of the 1980s, the growth rates in Germany and Japan ranged from 10 to 20%, that is, they were the highest among developed countries. The "Japanese" and "German miracles" had a lot in common. The most important was: minimizing military spending in these countries that lost the Second World War; use of traditional diligence, discipline and high cultural and educational level; the development of not energy- and resource-intensive industries, but the production of finished, complex products (cars, sophisticated electronics, ingenious technological lines, etc.); expedient redistribution of national income through a system of progressive taxation, in which the upper values were up to 50-80%. Creation and development of international financial structures (World Bank, IMF, IBRD). The process of integration of states in various fields of activity in recent decades has been called globalization. A major result of the cooperation that developed between the countries of the anti-Hitler coalition during the Second World War was the creation in 1945 of the United Nations. By 2006, 192 states were members of the UN. The range of UN activities in the system of international economic relations is very wide and fully reflects the trends of internationalization and globalization of modern economic life. An important aspect of globalization is the increasing integration of world economies, facilitated by the ease of movement of goods and capital across national borders. The international monetary system is a set of monetary relations that have developed on the basis of economic life and the development of the world market. The main components of the world monetary system are: - a certain set of international means of payment, - a currency exchange regime, including exchange rates, convertibility conditions, - regulation of the forms of international payments, - a network of international banking institutions that carry out international payments and credit operations. In 1944, the International Monetary and Financial Conference was held in Bretton Woods (USA), at which it was decided to establish the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD) and the International Monetary Fund (IMF). Both organizations have the status of specialized agencies of the United Nations. The IBRD began operating in 1946 and the IMF in 1947. The purpose of the IBRD is to assist member countries in obtaining long-term loans and credits, as well as guaranteeing private investment. In the first post-war years, the IBRD provided significant loans to the countries of Western Europe for economic recovery. In the future, the main object of the IBRD's activities were developing countries. Since the end of the 1980s, the IBRD began to provide loans to the countries of Eastern Europe. Russia joined the IBRD in 1992. IBRD issues bonds, which are bought by private banks, receiving over 9%. From the collected funds, the IBRD provides loans covering about 30% of the cost of the object, and the rest must be financed from internal or other sources. IBRD loans are provided for the development of energy, transport, communications and other infrastructure sectors for up to 20 years at a high interest rate, determined by the level of interest rates in the loan capital market. If the initial capital of the bank did not exceed $10 billion, then in 1995 it exceeded $176 billion. 181 states are members of the IBRD. 182 countries are members of the IMF. The Russian Federation has been a member of the IMF since 1992. The goal of the IMF was proclaimed to promote the development of international trade and monetary cooperation by eliminating foreign exchange restrictions, as well as providing foreign exchange loans to equalize balances of payments and establish norms for regulating exchange rates. The capital of the IMF has come close to $300 billion, with the United States, Great Britain, Germany, France and Japan having the greatest influence in accordance with the largest quotas. Quotas are set depending on the level of economic development of the country and its role in the world economy and trade. Since 1944, the Bretton Woods monetary system has been in effect. It provided for the preservation of the functions of world money for gold while simultaneously using national monetary units, primarily the US dollar, as well as the British pound sterling, as international payment and reserve currencies. The obligatory exchange of reserve currencies for gold was established by foreign government agencies and central banks at the official rate - $ 35 per troy ounce - 31.1 g of gold. Mutual equalization and exchange of currencies was envisaged on the basis of currency parities agreed with the IMF in gold and US dollars. Deviation of market exchange rates was allowed no more than 1%. The dollar was in a privileged position. The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) dates back to January 1, 1948. At its core, GATT is a binding treaty between the governments of member states. Initially, there were 23 of them, and by 1994 their number had reached over 100. The goal of the GATT was proclaimed to provide a predictable international trading environment and trade liberalization in the interests of promoting economic development. GATT performed very important functions: establishing rules binding on governments in the field of international trade and related areas of economic relations; conducting trade negotiations; fulfilling the duties of an international "court" on trade matters. Thanks to the GATT, publicity, non-discrimination, and national treatment of taxes and duties on imported goods have become universally recognized in the system of international economic relations. By 1994, the GATT member countries accounted for over 90% of world trade. The average level of customs duties on goods under the GATT was reduced from 40% to 4%. Thanks to GATT, streamlining began in such important areas as trade in services, the results of creative activity, and foreign investment related to trade. Back in 1982, the USSR established contacts with the Secretariat (in the city of Geneva) and the main countries participating in the agreement. On May 16, 1990, the USSR received observer status in the GATT. The Russian Federation began to participate in some of the working bodies of the GATT, and in June 1993, the Director General of the GATT received an application from the Government of the Russian Federation with a request to join this agreement. We have to talk about GATT in the past tense, since on January 1, 1995, by decision of the Uruguay Round of multilateral negotiations on the legal basis of GATT, the World Trade Organization (WTO) was formed. Any organization that accepts the obligations of the entire package of documents underlying the WTO can become a member of the WTO. At the end of 1996, 130 states became members of the WTO, and another 30 expressed interest in joining it. An important role in the functioning of a complex system of international economic relations is played by structures created under the United Nations (UN). Among them are such UN specialized agencies as the International Maritime Organization (IMO), the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), and the International Labor Organization (ILO). Since 1968, the Commission on the Law of International Trade (UNISTRAL) began to work, the purpose of which is to harmonize and unify the law of international trade. UNISTRAL has developed a number of international legal documents approved by the UN. By 2000, there were over 400 intergovernmental and about 3,000 non-governmental international organizations in the world. International economic organizations can be characterized as organizations created at the interstate, intergovernmental, interministerial levels or created by business and public organizations to coordinate the activities of countries in various spheres of the world economy. The creation of international economic organizations was a product of the growing internationalization of economic life, the globalization of economic processes. Transformation of neo-colonialism and economic globalization. Coordination of efforts in order to achieve concrete results has become an important way for countries that have begun to free themselves from colonial dependence to fight for their place in the system of international economic relations. In 1963, at the 18th session of the UN General Assembly, developing countries for the first time jointly expressed their point of view on international economic problems. In 1964, the name Group of 77 appeared, as 77 states signed the corresponding declaration on trade and development at the UN Geneva Conference. The declaration spoke about the general and special principles of international economic relations: about the sovereign equality of states, about accelerating economic growth and reducing the gap in income levels of different countries, regardless of the political system, about increasing the export earnings of third world countries, etc. Over time, the Group of 77 included 120 states of Asia, Africa and Latin America, as well as the European countries of Malta, Romania, and the SFRY. In 1974, at the initiative of the Group of 77, the VI Special Session of the UN General Assembly adopted the Declaration and Program of Action for the Establishment of a New Economic Order. Along with international organizations whose activities are of global importance, there are many regional organizations. In 1945, the League of Arab States (LAS) was formed. The members of this regional organization are 22 Arab states: Egypt, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Yemen, Libya, etc. The Arab League coordinates the activities of its members in the political, economic, military and other spheres, develops a unified policy of the Arab states on a number of pan-Arab problems. In the Middle East, Arab funds and development banks play a significant role, the purpose of which is to lend to developing countries - oil importers. In 1971-1980, over 100 developing countries received subsidies, but ¾ of the funds were given to the Arab states.
Globalization is the process by which the world is transformed into a single global system. The issue of globalization became very relevant in the 1990s, although various aspects of this process have been seriously discussed by scientists since the 1960s and 1970s.
ECONOMIC CYCLE AND ECONOMIC CRISIS
Business cycle(from the Greek circle) - a set of economic phenomena and processes that make a circuit over a period of time. The economic cycle is the movement of the economy from one state to another. In all economic cycles, four phases can be distinguished: rise (production expansion), peak (top of business activity), recession (depression), bottom (lowest point of activity).
Types of economic cycles:
a) short-term- a short-term deviation of market demand from the supply of goods and services. Arise due to overproduction (surplus) or underproduction (deficit) of goods on the market;
b) medium urgency- deviation associated with a change in demand for equipment and facilities. It lasts from 8 to 12 years. Medium-term economic cycles occur in all countries in the form of economic ups and downs;
in) long- associated with the transition from one technological mode of production to another. They last about 60 years and are associated with the development of scientific and technological progress (STR).
The economic growth- favorable development of the economy: an increase in production, consumption and investment (investment in economic sectors). The demand for goods and services is growing. Inflation and unemployment are low.
Economic crisis- unfavorable development of the economy: a sharp decline in production and trade, the lowest point of development. Accompanied by unemployment and a decline in living standards.
Types of crises. By scale: general (covers the entire economy) and sectoral (covers individual industries: currency, exchange, credit, financial). By regularity: irregular and regular (often recurring). By the level of supply and demand (crises of underproduction and overproduction).
In the 17th century economic crises were thought to be accidental. The causes of the crisis were sought in violations in the field of money demand. The well-known economist J. Keynes saw the origins of the crisis in the weakness of the market mechanism. Marxism is in the contradictions of capitalism and the private capitalist form of appropriation. In the modern economy, there are internal causes of economic crises: imbalance of supply and demand (overproduction or underproduction), development of scientific and technological revolution, high inflation and unemployment, speculation with securities, government activities. External reasons: social cataclysms, wars, revolutions.
economic depression- the most acute form of the crisis, in which there is a very high level of unemployment and an almost complete halt in the production of goods and products. During the economic crisis and the Great Depression in 1933, about 2 thousand people died of starvation in the United States.
Ways out of the crisis: gradual recovery of the economy from its own reserves and loans from foreign countries: reducing inflation and unemployment, raising wages, strengthening the national currency, etc.
71) Socio-economic development of the USSR in the mid-60s - 80s
The main feature of the socio-economic life of the 60-80s was the constant search for new ways of development, with which the party leadership could not finally decide. In the 1960s, the government still made attempts to maintain the reformist impulses of the Khrushchev period, but starting from the 1970s, this process finally stopped.
Industrial Reform 1965
The economic reform, which was adopted in 1965, was the most ambitious transformation in the post-war period of the USSR. A. N. Kosygin was involved in the development of the reform, although the foundations were laid by the Khrushchev government.
The transformations affected industry, agriculture, construction and management. Changes took place in the management of industry, the planned system was partially refuted, the assessment of the activities of enterprises was not the quantity of manufactured products, but the volume of its sale.
Financing of enterprises engaged in construction was carried out with the help of interest-free loans. The results of the reform. Businesses that have migrated to the new system have seen significant performance improvements.
The fuel and energy complex became the core of the state's economy: the USSR took the world's leading position in the production of oil and gas. During the period of the reform, the military-industrial complex was significantly strengthened.
In pursuit of parity with the United States, the Soviet state began mass production of ballistic missiles and medium-range nuclear missiles. The scientific and technical potential of the state has also increased. During this period, new industries emerged in the Soviet industry - microelectronics, robotics and nuclear engineering.
Despite the apparent growth of the economy, the leadership of the USSR failed to consolidate the results of the reform, and by the beginning of the 70s, production volumes began to steadily fall.
Agriculture
If the industrial reform brought the expected results, then the attempts to transform the agrarian sector suffered a crushing failure from the very beginning. Most state farms and collective farms, despite the financial support of the state, brought losses.
The rate of agricultural production was only 1% per year. Since the mid-1960s, the government began to regularly buy grain abroad. The crisis of the agrarian complex has not been eliminated.
Social life
In the 1960s and 1980s, the Soviet state experienced increased urbanization. Rural residents massively moved to big cities, as work in production brought a stable income, unlike labor on the ground.
By the beginning of 1980, the urban population was 62%, rural 12%, military personnel 16%. Until the mid-1970s, the life of the Soviet people was distinguished by social and economic stability; education, housing and medicine in the state were free.
The situation changed dramatically in 1976, when the crisis of production first began to affect the life of society. The food problem has worsened necessary products was in short supply. The agricultural sector could not meet the food needs of the population.
Despite this, the country's leadership did not stop financing the space and military industries, which led to a socio-economic paradox: in a state that was the world leader in the production of ballistic missiles and nuclear weapons, it was not possible to easily buy milk and butter.
72) Socio-political development of the USSR in the mid-60s, half of the 80s
In October 1964, N.S. Khrushchev was accused of "voluntarism" and "subjectivism", removed from all posts and retired.
The ruling elite did not want to endure Khrushchev's reform actions, which were accompanied by a personnel reshuffling. The people did not understand Khrushchev's struggle for a "bright future" with the deterioration of current life.
L.I. was elected the first secretary of the Central Committee of the CPSU. Brezhnev, A.N. was appointed Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the USSR. Kosygin. With the advent of Brezhnev to power, the management of Soviet society passes to a "new" class (700 thousand people), a class of managers devoid of faith in social justice and many moral prohibitions. The nomenklatura surrounded itself with new privileges and material benefits, and its most corrupt members were associated with the "shadow economy". The main source of enrichment for the ruling class in the 1960s and early 1980s was all sorts of abuses of office, bribes, and postscripts. By the mid-1980s, the ruling elite was turning from managers of "socialist" property into its real owners. An atmosphere of impunity and permissiveness is being created.
The domestic policy of the Brezhnev administration was conservative ("neo-Stalinism"). Since the second half of the 60s, criticism of the cult of Stalin was banned, the process of rehabilitation of the repressed was stopped, and the persecution of dissidents began. In the 1970s, dissent joined the dissident movement, whose characteristic features were anti-communism and anti-Sovietism (academician A.D. Sakharov, writer A.I. Solzhenitsyn, musician M.A. Rostropovich).
In 1977, the new Constitution of the USSR was adopted, which legally fixed the construction of "developed socialism". The Constitution expanded the social rights of citizens: the right to work, free education, medical care, recreation, etc. The Constitution of the USSR for the first time officially fixed the special role of the CPSU in society. political life The countries of the first half of the 1980s were characterized by a frequent change of top leadership: in November 1982, L.I. Brezhnev, in February 1984 Yu.V. Andropov, in March 1985 - K.U. Chernenko.
Since the end of 1964, the country's leadership has been trying to carry out economic reforms. The March plenum of the Central Committee of the CPSU (1965) outlined measures for agriculture: establish a firm purchase plan for 6 years (1965 - 1970) increase purchase prices, introduce a 50% surcharge for above-plan products, increase investment in the countryside, reduce taxes . The implementation of these measures led to a temporary acceleration of agricultural production. The essence of the economic reform in industry (September 1965) was as follows: the transition to sectoral management, the transfer of enterprises to self-financing, the reduction in the number of planned indicators (instead of 30-9), the creation of incentive funds at enterprises. A.N. played an active role in the preparation and implementation of the reform. Kosygin (Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the USSR).
The economic reform of 1965 proved to be successful during the years of the 8th Five-Year Plan (1966-1970), the volume of industrial production grew by 50%. 1900 large enterprises were built (the Volga Automobile Plant in Tolyatti produced the first Zhiguli in 1970). Agricultural production increased by 20%.
By the early 1970s, the reform had ceased to operate. Market mechanisms for managing production were paralyzed by the command and control system. Agriculture again moved to the 2nd plan. Economic reform, not supported by the reform of the political system, was doomed.
From the beginning of the 70s. increased the rate of decline in production. The economy continued to develop on an extensive basis, mainly in breadth (involvement in production of additional material and human resources). There were not enough workers at the newly built factories and factories due to the low birth rate. Labor productivity has fallen. The economy has become immune to innovation. Only enterprises that worked for military orders were distinguished by high technology.
The country's economy was militarized. Military spending grew twice as fast as national income. Of the 25 billion rubles. total spending on science 20 billion rubles. accounted for military-technical research.
Civil industry suffered losses. By the beginning of the 80s, only 10% - 15% of enterprises were automated. During the years of the 9th Five-Year Plan (1971 - 1975), economic growth stopped. The appearance of the well-being of the national economy was provided through the sale of natural resources - gas and oil. "Petrodollars" were spent on the development of the eastern regions of the country, the creation of gigantic territorial-production complexes. The construction of the century was carried out (VAZ, KAMAZ). From 1974-1984 the Baikal-Amur Mainline (BAM) was built - 3 thousand km.
Agriculture remained the weakest industry in the 1970s and 1980s. The old management system interfered with the independence of the heads of collective farms and state farms. Purchase prices for agricultural products were low, and for agricultural machinery - high. The state was forced to import grain (1979 - 1084 - 40 million tons per year).
In the 1970s, a campaign was launched on the "second virgin lands" - the Non-Chernozem region (29 regions and republics of Russia). The main emphasis was placed on agro-industrial integration, i.e. the unification of agriculture with the sectors that serve it - industry, transport, trade. The mass liquidation of "unpromising villages" (200,000) began. In 1982, a food program was developed to solve the food problem in the USSR by 1990.
Crisis phenomena gradually accumulated in the social sphere. The rise in the living standards of the population stopped, there was a deficit, a hidden rise in prices. This became the economic prerequisite for the formation of a "shadow economy".
From the mid-60s to the mid-80s, the political regime in the USSR "came to its senses" after the debunking of Stalin and other innovations of the Khrushchev "thaw", the readiness of society for change was limited by the rigid framework of the ideological paradigm of "building communism", the political monopoly of the party- state structures, the nomenklatura, which is a stronghold of conservatism, and the absence of influential social groups interested in dismantling totalitarianism.
Despite the official thesis about the rapprochement of social groups, in reality there was a complication of social relations. Differentiation in the quality and standard of living, the real rights of the administrative system and the rest of the population increased.
The contradictory nature of phenomena in Soviet society could not but be reflected in the development of its spiritual sphere - education, science, culture.
Relations between government and society in the period from the mid-60s to the mid-80s led to the third wave of emigration.
All this reflected the presence, interweaving and confrontation of two trends in the spiritual life of Soviet society from the mid-1960s to the mid-1980s - official-protective and democratic.
During these years, a dissident movement was born, which will be discussed in this paper.
Phenomenon of dissidence
The Brezhnev team rather quickly took a course towards suppressing dissent, and the boundaries of what was permitted narrowed, and what under Khrushchev was completely allowed and even recognized by the System, from the end of the 60s could be classified as a political crime. Indicative in this regard is the example of the head of the State Committee for Television and Radio Broadcasting of the USSR N. Mesyats, who, being appointed to the post in the October days of 1964 and called upon to ensure control over information programs, sincerely believed that it was enough to press a certain "button" and such control will be implemented.
The origins of the revival of the organized movement of dissidents can with good reason be considered the 20th Congress of the CPSU and the campaign of condemnation of the "cult of personality" that began immediately after it. The population of the country, party organizations and labor collectives, representatives of not only the intelligentsia, but also the working class, the peasantry took the new course so seriously that they did not notice how criticism of Stalinism smoothly flowed into criticism of the System itself. But the authorities were vigilant. The persecution of dissidents (and in this case - on consistent guides to the life of the decisions of the party congress) fell upon immediately.
And yet the beginning of the dissident movement in its classic version It was laid down in 1965 by the arrest of A. Sinyavsky and Y. Daniel, who published in the West one of their works, Walks with Pushkin. It was from this time that the authorities began a targeted fight against dissidence, thereby causing the growth of this movement. From the same time, the creation of a network of underground circles, wide in geography and representative in composition of participants, set as its task the change in the existing political order.
The speech on August 25, 1968 against the Soviet intervention in Czechoslovakia, which took place on Red Square, became a symbol of dissidence. Eight people took part in it: student T. Baeva, linguist K. Babitsky, philologist L. Bogoraz, poet V. Delaunay, worker V. Dremlyuga, physicist P. Litvinov, art critic V. Fayenberg and poetess N. Gorbanevskaya. However, there were other, less explicit forms of disagreement, which made it possible to avoid administrative and even criminal prosecution: participation in a society for the protection of nature or religious heritage, the creation different kind appeals to "future generations", without a chance for publication then and discovered today, finally, the rejection of a career - how many young intellectuals of the 70s preferred to work as janitors or stokers. The poet and bard Y. Kim recently wrote about the connection with his last, which was a great success performance "Moscow Kitchens", that the Brezhnev era remains in the memory of Moscow intellectuals as the years spent in the kitchen, talking "in their circle" on the topic of how to change the world. Were there not some kind of "kitchens", albeit of a different level, the university in Tartu, the department of Professor V. Yadov at Leningrad University, the Institute of Economics of the Siberian Branch of the Academy of Sciences and other places, official and unofficial, where jokes about the squalor of life and the stuttering of the Secretary General interspersed disputes in which the future was anticipated?
Directions of the dissident movement
The first is civil movements ("politicians"). The largest among them was the human rights movement. Its supporters declared: “Protection of human rights, its fundamental civil and political freedoms, protection by open, legal means, within the framework of existing laws, constituted the main pathos of the human rights movement ... Repulsion from political activity, a suspicious attitude towards ideologically colored projects of social reconstruction, rejection of any forms organizations - this is the set of ideas that can be called a human rights position";
The second is religious movements (faithful and free Seventh-day Adventists, evangelical Christians - Baptists, Orthodox, Pentecostals and others);
Third - national movements (Ukrainians, Lithuanians, Latvians, Estonians, Armenians, Georgians, Crimean Tatars, Jews, Germans and others).
Stages of the dissident movement
The participants in the movement themselves were the first to propose a periodization of the movement, in which they saw four main stages.
The first stage (1965 - 1972) can be called the period of formation.
These years were marked by:
- "campaign of letters" in defense of human rights in the USSR; the creation of the first circles and groups of human rights orientation;
Organization of the first financial aid funds for political prisoners;
The activation of the positions of the Soviet intelligentsia not only in relation to events in our country, but also in other states (for example, in Czechoslovakia in 1968, Poland in 1971, etc.);
Public protest against the re-Stalinization of society; appeal not only to the authorities of the USSR, but also to the world community (including the international communist movement);
The creation of the first policy documents of the liberal-Western (work by A.D. Sakharov "Reflections on Progress, Peaceful Coexistence and Intellectual Freedom") and the soil ("Nobel Lecture" by A.I. Solzhenitsyn) directions;
The beginning of the publication of "Chronicles of Current Events";
Creation on May 28, 1969 of the country's first open public association - the Initiative Group for the Protection of Human Rights in the USSR;
The mass scope of the movement (according to the KGB for 1967-1971, 3,096 "groups of a politically harmful nature" were identified; 13,602 people who were part of them were prevented; the geography of the movement in these years marked the entire country for the first time);
The coverage of the movement, in essence, all social strata of the country's population, including workers, military personnel, workers of state farms,
The efforts of the authorities in the fight against dissent during this period were mainly focused on:
On the organization in the KGB of a special structure (the Fifth Directorate), focused on ensuring control over the mindset and "prevention" of dissidents;
Widespread use of psychiatric facilities to combat dissidents;
Changing Soviet legislation in the interests of fighting dissidents;
Suppression of ties of dissidents with foreign countries.
The second stage (1973 - 1974) is usually considered the period of the movement's crisis. This state is associated with the arrest, investigation and trial of P. Yakir and V. Krasin, during which they agreed to cooperate with the KGB. The result of this was new arrests of participants and some attenuation of the human rights movement. The authorities attacked samizdat. Numerous searches, arrests and trials took place in Moscow, Leningrad, Vilnius, Novosibirsk, Kyiv and other cities.
The third stage (1974 - 1975) is considered to be the period of wide international recognition of the dissident movement. During this period, the creation of the Soviet branch of the international organization "Amnisty International" falls; deportation from the country of A. Solzhenitsyn; awarding the Nobel Prize to A. Sakharov; resumption of the issue of the Chronicle of Current Events.
The fourth stage (1976 - 1981) is called Helsinki. During this period, a group was created to promote the implementation of the Helsinki agreements in the USSR, headed by Yu. Orlov (Moscow Helsinki Group - MHG). The group saw the main content of its activities in the collection and analysis of materials available to it about the violation of the humanitarian articles of the Helsinki Accords and informing the governments of the participating countries about them. Her work was painfully perceived by the authorities, not only because it contributed to the growth of the human rights movement, but also because after the Helsinki meeting it became much more difficult to deal with dissidents using the old methods. It was also important that the MHG established links with religious and national movements, primarily those not connected with each other, and began to perform some coordinating functions. At the end of 1976 - beginning of 1977. on the base national movements Ukrainian, Lithuanian, Georgian, Armenian, Helsinki groups were created. In 1977, a working commission was created at the MHG to investigate the use of psychiatry for political purposes.
Conclusion
So, the dissident movement is the most radical, visible and courageous expression of dissent.
The beginning of the dissident movement in its classical form was laid in 1965 by the arrest of Sinyavsky and Daniele.
There are three main directions in the dissident movement:
1. civil movements;
2. religious movements;
3. national movements.
There are four stages of the dissident movement.
The most active forms of protest were characteristic mainly of three strata of society: the creative intelligentsia, believers, and some national minorities.
The 70s were marked by:
A number of obvious successes of the KGB in the fight against all forms of dissidence;
The continuous decline in the international prestige of the USSR due to repression.
All these directions and forms of protest will be recognized and flourish in the period of "glasnost".
73) The foreign policy of the USSR in the mid-60s - 80s
In the mid-60s and early 80s, the USSR was in a state of confrontation with the capitalist West. Foreign policy during this period was of a contrasting nature: the thaw in international relations often turned into a new aggravation of contradictions.
The diplomacy of the USSR in the mid-1960s and early 1980s should be considered in two main streams of political relations with the socialist camp and the capitalist states.
The foreign policy of the Soviet Union with the socialist countries
The diplomatic relations of the Soviet Union with the countries of the socialist camp were regulated by the so-called Brezhnev Doctrine, the meaning of which was the need to preserve the unity of the proletarian states by any means and consolidate the leading role of the USSR in the socialist world.
The Soviet army actively participated in the suppression of anti-socialist uprisings in Czechoslovakia ("Prague Spring", 1968). An attempt was also made to intervene in the internal confrontation between the communists and democrats in Poland, however, the beginning socio-economic Soviet crisis forced the government of the USSR to abandon the use of the Prague experience.
In the early 1970s, tension arose in Soviet-Chinese relations. The Communist Party of China began to claim leadership in the socialist camp, gradually ousting the USSR. After short military conflicts, and the departure from the political arena of Mao Zedong, the diplomatic relations of the Soviet state with the friendly Republic of China were completely severed.
The government of the USSR failed to implement the "Brezhnev Doctrine" to the end. The socialist republics, willingly entering into diplomatic relations with the Soviet Union and taking advantage of the prerogatives provided by a powerful "mentor" in the foreign market, nevertheless actively defended their sovereignty and political independence.
The embodiment of the world proletarian revolution was significantly delayed, and over time it completely lost its relevance.
USSR and the capitalist world
The international relations of the parties to the Cold War were characterized by instability. In the mid-60s, political and military parity was achieved between the USSR and the USA, which meant the potential threat of the outbreak of the Third World War.
However, during R. Nixon's official visit to Moscow in 1972, an agreement was signed between the states that limited the strategic possession of nuclear weapons by both countries, as well as their non-use in peace conditions. This was the first step towards nuclear disarmament and significantly eased the tension between the powers.
Since 1973 international relationships The USSR and the countries of the capitalist West gained stability and were based on friendly good neighborliness, without putting forward political claims. Diplomatic relations with the West were destabilized in 1979 when Soviet armed forces with an international mission invaded Afghanistan.
Start of the war in Afghanistan was not based on good reasons, the motivation for helping the Afghan people in the construction of socialism looked unconvincing in the eyes of Western democracy.
The Soviet government ignored the warnings of the West, which gave rise to a new stage in the Cold War. By the beginning of the 1980s, diplomatic relations were finally severed, and the parties again returned to mutual threats of a nuclear attack.
On September 26, 1968, the Pravda newspaper published the so-called "Brezhnev Doctrine" on the "limited sovereignty" of the socialist countries in the face of the danger hanging over the world socialist system... Doctrine was that the USSR could interfere in the internal affairs of the countries of Central and Eastern Europe, which were part of the socialist bloc in order to ensure the stability of the political course, which was built on the basis of real socialism and aimed at close cooperation with the USSR. The word "doctrine" in the Soviet foreign policy lexicons of the military-political field never got used, this word did not take root. There were decrees and declarations, the opinion of TASS or the Soviet government was expressed. The Brezhnev Doctrine was explained and fueled by ideological, political and economic factors. Soviet leaders from Stalin to Andropov intuitively understood the importance of geopolitics as a factor in the security of the Soviet Union. The main pillars of Soviet foreign policy under Brezhnev were the principles of peaceful coexistence and proletarian socialist internationalism. The foundations of the foreign policy of the Soviet Union were formed in real world, where there was a constant fierce struggle for military-political spheres of influence and economic interests. Everyone remembers that there were doctrines of US Presidents Truman, Eisenhower, Nixon. Theoretically, they were based on the principles of political realism, which were developed by perhaps the most famous American analysts, Hans Morgenthau and George Kennan. Kennan, for example, put into circulation the doctrine of the containment of communism, which in practice became the doctrine of the rejection of communism. US Secretaries of State Kissinger and Christopher believed and continue to believe that in world politics there is a constant struggle for influence, power, initiative, the state achieves its goal by adapting or imposing its will on others. Either they adapt or they impose. The main conductor of the foreign policy of the USSR was the Minister of Foreign Affairs Andrei Gromyko. He said that the world is socially bipolar, that there are fundamental differences between the two systems - capitalist and socialist. Along with cooperation within the framework of peaceful coexistence, there is a struggle that must be waged by peaceful means. The communist ideology, the economic and military might of the Soviet Union and its allies are the main means of maintaining the balance of power on the world stage. The nuclear arms race is the greatest threat to humanity. The race must be stopped, weapons banned. The United States and NATO are objectively interested in this. The Soviet Union has many allies and friends on the world stage, and we must support them. This is an axiom of any diplomacy. Friends are easy to lose and hard to find. For the security of the Soviet Union, the Warsaw Pact was created, hence the support provided to the GDR. Everyone knows, for example, that the minister, when he flew to the FRG, always stayed in the GDR. It was a conscious policy.
74)Reasons for a new attempt to reform the political system of the USSR
By the beginning of the 1980s, the Soviet economic system had exhausted its possibilities for development and had gone beyond the boundaries of its historical time. Having carried out industrialization and urbanization, the command economy could not further carry out deep transformations covering all aspects of society. First of all, it turned out to be incapable in the radically changed conditions to ensure the proper development of productive forces, protect human rights, and maintain the country's international prestige. The USSR with its gigantic reserves of raw materials, industrious and selfless population lagged behind the West more and more. The Soviet economy was not up to the increasing demands for the variety and quality of consumer goods. Industrial enterprises, not interested in scientific and technological progress, rejected up to 80% of new technical solutions and inventions. The growing inefficiency of the economy had a negative impact on the country's defense capability. In the early 1980s, the USSR began to lose competitiveness in the only industry in which it successfully competed with the West - in the field of military technology.
The economic base of the country ceased to correspond to the position of a great world power and needed urgent updating. At the same time, the enormous growth in the education and awareness of the people in the post-war period, the emergence of a generation that did not know hunger and repression, formed a higher level of material and spiritual needs of people, called into question the very principles underlying the Soviet totalitarian system. The very idea of a planned economy failed. Increasingly, state plans were not carried out and were continuously redrawn, the proportions in the sectors of the national economy were violated. Achievements in health care, education, culture were lost.
The spontaneous degeneration of the system changed the entire way of life of Soviet society: the rights of managers and enterprises were redistributed, departmentalism and social inequality intensified.
The nature of industrial relations within enterprises has changed, labor discipline has begun to fall, apathy and indifference, theft, disrespect for honest work, envy of those who earn more have become widespread. At the same time, non-economic coercion to work persisted in the country. The Soviet man, alienated from the distribution of the produced product, has turned into a performer who works not according to conscience, but under compulsion. The ideological motivation of labor developed in the post-revolutionary years weakened along with the belief in the imminent triumph of communist ideals.
However, in the end, completely different forces determined the direction and nature of the reform of the Soviet system. They were predetermined by the economic interests of the nomenklatura, the Soviet ruling class.
Thus, by the beginning of the 1980s, the Soviet totalitarian system was actually deprived of the support of a significant part of society.
Under the conditions of monopoly domination in society by one party, the CPSU, and the presence of a powerful repressive apparatus, changes could only begin "from above". The country's top leaders were clearly aware that the economy needed to be reformed, but none of the conservative majority of the Politburo of the Central Committee of the CPSU wanted to take responsibility for implementing these changes.
Even the most urgent problems were not solved in a timely manner. Instead of taking any measures to improve the economy, new forms of "socialist competition" were proposed. Enormous funds were diverted to numerous "constructions of the century" like the Baikal-Amur Mainline.
75) Goals and stages of perestroika Perestroika is the general name for the set of political and economic changes that took place in the USSR in 1986-1991. In the course of perestroika (especially since the second half of 1989 - after the First Congress of People's Deputies of the USSR), the political confrontation between the forces advocating the socialist path of development and parties and movements that link the future of the country with the organization of life on the principles of capitalism, as well as on issues of the future, sharply escalated. the image of the Soviet Union, the relationship between union and republican bodies of state power and administration. By the mid-1980s, the imminent need for change was clear to many in the country. Therefore, proposed in those conditions by M.S. Gorbachev's "perestroika" found a lively response in all strata of Soviet society. In short, “perestroika” meant: the creation of an effective mechanism for accelerating the socio-economic development of society; comprehensive development of democracy strengthening discipline and order respect for the value and dignity of the individual; renunciation of command and administration, encouragement of innovation; a decisive turn towards science, the combination of scientific and technical advances with the economy and much more. By the beginning of the 1990s, perestroika ended with an aggravation of the crisis in all spheres of society, the liquidation of the power of the CPSU and the collapse of the USSR. Stages of perestroika First stage (March 1985 - January 1987) This period was characterized by the recognition of some shortcomings of the existing political and economic system of the USSR and attempts to correct them with several large administrative campaigns (the so-called "Acceleration") - an anti-alcohol campaign, "the fight against unearned income ”, the introduction of state acceptance, a demonstration of the fight against corruption. No radical steps have yet been taken during this period; outwardly, almost everything remained the same. At the same time, in 1985-86, the bulk of the old cadres of the Brezhnev draft were replaced with a new team of managers. It was then that A. N. Yakovlev, E. K. Ligachev, N. I. Ryzhkov, B. N. Yeltsin, A. I. Lukyanov and other active participants in future events were introduced into the leadership of the country. The second stage (January 1987 - June 1989) An attempt to reform socialism in the spirit of democratic socialism. It is characterized by the beginning of large-scale reforms in all spheres of life of Soviet society. In public life, a policy of glasnost is proclaimed - mitigation of censorship in the media and the lifting of bans on what used to be considered taboo. In the economy, private entrepreneurship in the form of cooperatives is legalized, and joint ventures with foreign companies are being actively created. In international politics, the main doctrine is "New Thinking" - a course towards the rejection of the class approach in diplomacy and the improvement of relations with the West. Part of the population is seized with euphoria from the long-awaited changes and freedom unprecedented by Soviet standards. At the same time, during this period, general instability began to gradually increase in the country: the economic situation worsened, separatist sentiments appeared on the national outskirts, and the first interethnic clashes broke out. The third stage (June 1989-1991) The final stage, during this period, there is a sharp destabilization of the political situation in the country: after the Congress, the confrontation between the communist regime and the new political forces that arose as a result of the democratization of society begins. Difficulties in the economy develop into a full-blown crisis. The chronic commodity shortage reaches its climax: empty store shelves become a symbol of the turn of the 1980s and 1990s. Perestroika euphoria in society is replaced by disappointment, uncertainty about the future and mass anti-communist sentiments. Since 1990, the main idea is no longer "improving socialism", but building democracy and a market economy of the capitalist type. The “new thinking” in the international arena comes down to unilateral concessions to the West, as a result of which the USSR loses many of its positions and actually ceases to be a superpower, which a few years ago controlled half of the world. In Russia and other republics of the Union, separatist-minded forces come to power - a "parade of sovereignties" begins. The logical result of this development of events was the elimination of the power of the CPSU and the collapse of the Soviet Union.
REASONS FOR RESTRUCTURING
Perestroika is the final stage in the history of the USSR, which began in 1985 with the reforms of the Soviet Union. However, the feeling of the need for change arose in Soviet society back in the era of "stagnation". In his work, L.I. Brezhnev and his entourage relied primarily on the officials of the CPSU apparatus, who controlled literally everything in the country - from the queue for foreign intelligence to the production of children's toys. Such a system made it possible to make various kinds of illegal transactions and receive large bribes. This is how the first large capitals, often of criminal origin, began to form in the USSR.
Archives against the lies of Mario Sousa or the question of the number of those executed during the terror of 1937-1938.
The main purpose of this post is to analyze the "neo-Stalinist concept" circulating in various incarnations and variants that the number of sentences to VMN during the terror of 1937-1938 allegedly radically and radically differs from actually executed sentences downwards.
I'll start by tradition a little from Adam.
Watching the endless, senseless and merciless discussions about the scale of mass shootings in Soviet period, I come to the banal conclusion that the average person in the era of crazy media should always read very carefully and critically filter materials about 1937-1938.
Before and during perestroika, insane anti-Soviet people (exaggeratedly) ruled the public mind, after perestroika and the so-called "archival revolution" (opening of archives) of the 90s, as a reaction to insane anti-Soviet people, no less crazy "pro-advisers" began to appear for sure also distorting the texture and statistics, but with the opposite sign.
After the revolution, there is counter-revolution and reaction; after reaction, another revolution against reaction.
Significant exaggerations of the figures of the repressed in pre-perestroika, perestroika and samizdat, memoir literature is an absolute fact. As well as the fact that the same “samizdatists” have now appeared, on the contrary, with the opposite ideological sign, who are trying in every possible way to justify, rationalize and downplay the repressions. Why, who, to what extent and for what reasons exaggerated these figures in the 1930s-1980s is a separate issue that deserves a detailed article and will not be considered by me here.
But I have always been interested in the curious process of fighting falsifications with other falsifications. In other words, overthrowing the anti-Soviet myth from its pedestal, ardent fighters (and sometimes reputable academic historians) erect another “pro-Soviet” myth in its place, sometimes downplaying and demagoguery, and often simply inventing facts, no worse than the most odious ones. representatives from the other flank.
It is, of course, more and more difficult for a simple layman and non-specialist to understand this stunning flow of mutually exclusive information in the era of media quackery. A gigantic stream of opinions, facts, versions merges into one monolithic already meaningless lump. Verified sources, figures, statistics lose their meaning for the mass reader. People are already beginning to believe only what fits into their "ideologically verified" picture of the world. Everything else seems to be a distortion, a falsification. Publics in contact and others social networks, reposts become the limit above which the argument does not apply.
And here it is precisely on politicized, controversial topics that unscrupulous journalistic characters of various ideological shades, who are commonly called folk historians in our country, catch "fried" "fried". They bred in recent times a great many and traditionally academic historians very rarely enter into polemics with them.
As you know, I still sometimes do not, no, and I sin, following a simple principle - if you do not disassemble all these verses, they will pile up to such monstrous Ridges of Madness that Howard Lafcraft will write a book The Great Slandered Cthulhu.
Moreover, there are different gradations and forms of such scumbags. There is a pseudoscience, and there is for reposts. Science-like zalepuha is the most dangerous, from my point of view. There, such a maxim is immediately postulated with aplomb - "Everyone slandered. And we know the Truth (necessarily with a capital letter) Everything is based on archives. We are unbiased, we scientific approach, figures, statistics, dry facts, documents, they manipulate your consciousness, but I don’t manipulate your consciousness at all, I’m honest, unemotional and objective. "And people are being led. They pass off their own bias as "impartiality". Extinguish fire with fire, well, etc. It is eternal like the world.
An ideal illustration of such profanity is the well-known "Manipulation of Consciousness" by chemist S.G. Kara-Murza, where the author, not being either a professional historian or even just a person savvy in matters of the history of repression, scourging the verb fights with insidious manipulation technologies, using exactly the same the very methods against which it declaratively opposes.
But closer, in fact, to the essence of the post.
If you think logically, what do not like modern radical neo-Stalinists, who "objectively", "impartially" and "not biased" are trying to save our history from "denigration" and "spitting" with "reliance on archives"? They are very uncomfortable with the figure of about 700 thousand executed in 1937-1938.
I will not retell in detail the factology, chronology and outline of the Great Terror, it is well known and its detailed coverage is not included in the topic of this essay. I will confine myself to the most general strokes.
Operational Order of the People's Commissar of Internal Affairs of the USSR No. 00447 "On the operation to repress former kulaks, criminals and other anti-Soviet elements", (CA FSB RF, F.66, Op. 5. D. 2 L.155-174. Original.) after the approval of its text by the Politburo and the lengthy preparation of procedural nuances was signed by People's Commissar N.I. Yezhov and sent to the territorial bodies of the NKVD at the end of July 1937.
This order marked the beginning of the "kulak operation" and was supplemented by a whole series of other orders that launched the so-called "national operations."
Specially for carrying out the repressive action at the highest possible pace and in a simplified manner, so-called special teams were formed on the ground, which included the prosecutor, the head of the local UNKVD and the secretary of the regional committee (in addition to the special teams, other quasi-judicial and judicial bodies also operated during these years: the so-called "twos", special troikas created chronologically later, ordinary courts, military tribunals, the Military Collegium of the Supreme Court of the USSR, the Special Meeting also worked). They were given the right to pass sentences. The defendant was not supposed to have any defense, or even face-to-face presence. The volume of cases under consideration was so great that often "special construction" decisions were made on 200-300 cases per day, and sometimes more.
The operation was carried out (planned, financed, coordinated and directed) in the strictest secrecy and clearly according to the plan, certain quotas were allocated from the center to the regions for execution (the so-called 1st category) and for imprisonment (2nd category).
On the basis of the "kulak" order from August 1937 to November 1938, 390 thousand people were executed, 380 thousand were sent to labor camps. Accordingly, the originally set "limits" - to repress 268.95 thousand people, of which 75.95 thousand to be shot, were exceeded several times. The terms of the operation were repeatedly extended by Moscow, the regions were provided with additional "quotas" for execution and landing. In total, during the "kulak operation", mostly completed by the spring-summer of 1938, at least 818 thousand people were convicted, of which at least 436 thousand people were shot. All increases in "limits" were coordinated with the center by means of top-secret telegraph messages.
In the complex, all the operational work of the State Security Service (with the support of the police, the prosecutor's office and party bodies) developed into the so-called "mass operations" of the NKVD of 1937-1938: the largest one-time repressive action of the Soviet government in the 20th century in peacetime.
In total, in all operations (there were 12 of them in total), in 1937-1938, about 700 thousand people were shot. In accordance with the instructions of the Politburo, they were started, in accordance with the instructions of the Politburo, they were completed.
So, what does classical historiography know about the statistics of the so-called "mass operations" of the NKVD during these two peak years?
According to the "Certificate of the 1st Special Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the USSR on the number of those arrested and convicted in the period 1921-1953 on the affairs of the NKVD." ., total was arrested for 1921-1938. 4,835,937 people (c/r - 3,341,989, other crimes - 1,493,948), of which 2,944,879 were convicted, of which 745,220 were sentenced to VMN. to VMN 54,235 (of which 23,278 in 1942)
This is one and the same document, which is a set of four reference tables printed on five sheets.
They are stored in GARF, f.9401, op.1, d.4157, sheets 201-205.
Here is its scan in the part we are interested in.
In February 1954, the Prosecutor General of the USSR R. Rudenko, the Minister of Internal Affairs of the USSR S. Kruglov and the Minister of Justice of the USSR K. Gorshenin, in a memorandum addressed to Khrushchev, named the number of 642,980 people sentenced to VMN from 1921 to early 1954.
In 1956, Pospelov's commission gave a figure of 688,503 shot during the same period.
In 1963, in the report of the Shvernik commission, an even larger figure was named - 748.146 shot during the period 1935-1953, of which 681.692 - in 1937-38. (including 631,897 by decision of extrajudicial bodies.)
In 1988, in the certificate of the KGB of the USSR, presented to Gorbachev, 786,098 people were shot in 1930-55.
In 1992, according to the head of the registration and archival forms department of the IBRF for 1917-90. there are data on 827,995 sentenced to CMN for state and similar crimes.
There are also consolidated data in the CA FSB. According to the Certificate 1 of the special department of the NKVD of the USSR on the number of arrested and convicted during the period from October 1, 1936 to November 1, 1938 (CA FSB RF. F. 8 os. Op. 1. D. 70. L. 97-98. Original .. Published: Tragedy of the Soviet Village, Collectivization and Dekulakization, 1927-1939, in 5 volumes, vol. 5, books 1,2, M.: ROSSPEN, 2006. head of the 1st special department of the NKVD of the USSR, captain of state security Zubkin and head of the 5th department, senior lieutenant of state security Kremnev, from October 1, 1936 to November 1, 1938, 668,305 people were sentenced to VMN.
Now I do not want to go into nuances and explain these discrepancies, in general, they are quite explainable and verifiable.
So this order of numbers makes you nervous. Usually they make big eyes and use the phrase "only". Not 7 million were shot, but "only" 700 thousand. Allegedly, this "decrease" turns what happened in the USSR over these two years into "not so terrible and special."
This demagogic device, by the way, is actively used by both Holocaust deniers and neo-Nazis of all stripes. In Mathausen, not 1.5 million people died, but "only" 320 thousand people.
(Nota Bene: neo-Stalinists are also very uncomfortable and nervous about the unprecedented super-mortality in 1932-1933, for this they invent insane stuff about the American / tsarist famine to set off the unique nature of the disaster and prove that "it was even worse under the tsar, this is the legacy of a rotten tsarism / in other developed countries of that time it was the same, therefore the responsibility for the uniqueness of the catastrophe is completely (or at least partially) removed from the Bolsheviks, they, on the contrary, saved everyone).
On average, for two years in 1937-1938. around the country executed from 1000 to 1200 people a day. Never in the history of our justice system have there been so many executions in peacetime. This is a medical, clear fact. Such intensity of executions of even a very stubborn person, but not yet atrophied to the perception of numbers and the scale of the phenomenon, can make one think. In a couple of weeks in 1937, more people were shot than all the military district and military field courts of Tsarist Russia in 100 years. How, then, to talk about the bloodiness of tsarism, about the whips of the police officer, the hooves of the Cossacks and Colonel Rieman (and without this, nowhere), if in the eye it’s not just a log, but a whole ship timber.
Since the figure of 700 thousand physically destroyed in two years is definitely not to their liking, the radical Stalinists urgently need to somehow lower it. Put a shadow on the fence. But how? The common technique "only" 700 thousand "acts only on very dense individuals.
On the other hand, how to underestimate the well-founded figure, if in numerous archival, authentic and easily verified documents deposited in the state archive Russian Federation, the Central Archive of the FSB, certificates with summary statistics on the activities of state security agencies and Soviet justice contain approximately this order of numbers and no other? Very easy.
A simple but effective idea came to a certain Italian communist Mario Souza at the turn of the 2000s. Here is how his book is annotated in the Russian edition: Despite a number of fundamental works built on the factual material of the archives, which showed the inconsistency of Stalin's accusations of mass repressions, vicious slanderers like Radzinsky, Suvorov, Solzhenitsyn, Yakovlev (now deceased - ed.) continue their dirty work of denigrating Soviet history. This slander causes indignation among honest researchers of foreign countries. The proposed brochure, which is a translation from in English The work of Mario Sauce, published in the Canadian magazine Northstar compass (December 1999), refutes the fabrications about the deliberate famine in Ukraine, about the excessive cruelty of the Soviet punitive system, and, most importantly, about the fantastic scale of repression against the kulaks and conspirators.
Doctor of Philosophy, Professor I. Changli.
The honest researcher Mario Sousa decided to provide fraternal international assistance to our neo-Stalinists of all iterations and falsify the number of victims of the mass operations of the NKVD in 1937-1938. He succeeded. Help was gladly accepted. And dragged along the Runet and "orthodox" publics in social networks.
Has found its countless epigones.
The essence of Mario Sousa's "objective, unbiased, unemotional and taking into account good and bad, unquestionably archive-based discovery" is that in his work GULAG: archives against lies, carefully published in Moscow in 2001, he states literally the following: " Other information comes from the KGB: according to information presented to the press in 1990, 786,098 people were sentenced to death for counter-revolutionary activities in the 23 years from 1930 to 1953. Of these sentenced, according to the KGB, 681,692 were convicted in 1937-1938. This cannot be verified, and although these are KGB figures, the latest information is questionable. Indeed, it is very strange that in just 2 years so many people were sentenced to death. But should we expect more correct data from the capitalist KGB than from the socialist one? Thus, it only remains for us to check whether the statistics on convicts for 23 years, used by the KGB, extended to ordinary criminals and counter-revolutionaries, or only to counter-revolutionaries, as the perestroika KGB claims in a February 1990 press release. From the archives also it follows that the number of ordinary criminals and counter-revolutionaries sentenced to death was approximately the same. Based on the foregoing, we can conclude that the number of those sentenced to death in 1937-1938. there were about 100 thousand, and not several million, as Western propaganda claims.
It must also be taken into account that not all those sentenced to death were actually shot. A huge proportion of death sentences were commuted to terms in labor camps.
"
Not only does this sensational statement by Sousa not even have formal logic, it is not confirmed by any reference to the archive, and this despite the fact that the title pathetically declares: the author’s archives are fighting against lies. And that's how they all are.
In the Western world, Sousa's book was ignored, but here you can find his book on any site of the corresponding "objective" and "unbiased" direction. For example http://www.greatstalin.ru/truthaboutreprisals.aspx "
And the province went to write.
On the site http://stalinism.narod.ru/s_repress.htm (which was created by the notorious Internet publicist I.V. Mikhail Pozdnov. DEATH PENALTY IN THE USSR IN 1937-1938.
There, the author again tries to somehow undermine the figure of 700,000 shot, which the Stalinists do not like very much, with such arguments: " Another, more inexplicable inconsistency is the following circumstance. According to the Information, about 635 thousand people were sentenced to imprisonment in ITL, ITK and prisons in two years, however, according to Gulag statistics, 539,923 prisoners were admitted to ITL in 1937 alone (364 thousand were released), in 1938 - 600,724 (released 280 thousand). In addition, in 1937-1938 the number of those serving sentences in the correctional colony and prisons increased. Who condemned the "extra" hundreds of thousands of people who ended up in camps and prisons? As one of the versions, it can be assumed that some of the imaginary convicts to VMN were in the camps, and the number of those actually shot in 1937-1938. in fact, much less than official statistics suggest."
For Mikhail Pozdnov, who is certainly not engaged, it will probably be a wonderful discovery that in addition to the cases conducted by the state security agencies (and the progress of which is reflected in the certificate to which he refers), ordinary people's investigators and the prosecutor's office conducted criminal cases in the USSR, and sentenced to conclusion not only by extrajudicial bodies of the State Security, but also by "ordinary" courts of all levels and types, as well as military tribunals (the movement on which is not reflected in the Certificate), and it is clear that not only in "counter-revolutionary" cases. But ignorance helps conspiracy theorists. If you don't know something, you can always generalize and come up with a cryptic explanation about what the authorities are hiding.
I never understood. Well, you don’t know the justice system of the Soviet Union in the 1930s, the types of courts and quasi-judicial bodies operating at that time, you are not familiar with the primary reporting of state security and the People’s Commissariat of Justice with summary statistics, you haven’t been a day in the archives, you haven’t delved into the procedural features of the office work of those years, you are not interested in real numbers and facts, but only an ideological struggle is interesting - so why go into those areas where you are not initially competent, along the way waving catchy statements that I am fighting for the Truth against falsifications of archival data, actually distorting and falsifying?
It turns out a classic self-shot from a gun.
Further, Sousa's transcendental discovery about the "fictitious" figure of 700,000 people shot and only supposedly sentenced is embodied in another article from another "truth-seeker", this time a certain S. Mironin, whose work is published on http://stalinism.ru/ elektronnaya-biblioteka/stalinskiy-poryadok.html?start=9
Quote from his work:
"Shot for the entire period from the 1930s to 1953 no more than 300 thousand people. So, all the figures from the books of memory, from my calculations and the allowed figure are in good agreement with each other. Therefore, I personally consider the following opinion documented: the number of those executed in 1937-1938. does not exceed 250-300 thousand and these victims were concentrated in the main elite".
Naturally, there are no references to documents, and 33 links lead us all to the same "breaking the veil" from M. Souza.
In this statement, by the way, two lies are concentrated at once - in addition to underestimating the number of those executed, there is also a maxim that is extremely popular in certain circles that in 1937-1938 it was mainly party bureaucrats, embezzlers of public funds, the Leninist guard, Trotskyists, etc. who suffered ., which again does not coincide with the archive data at all. But why do we need archives, if we can engage in myth-making and fight against anti-Soviet propaganda with yet another pro-Soviet propaganda?
Drovishek was thrown into the fire by the already mentioned "specialist" S.G. Kara-Murza in his Soviet civilization: " Accurate statistics on the execution of sentences have not yet been published. But the number of executions is obviously less than the number of death sentences. The reason is that the employees of the OGPU, who themselves constituted a very vulnerable group, scrupulously followed the instructions and documented their actions."
So. Let's get acquainted with the documents in order to put an end to speculations about the real number of those executed and the execution of sentences to VMN during the mass operations of the NKVD in 1937-1938 once and for all.
Decree of the Politburo of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks of September 15, 1938 "On the Creation of Special Troikas"
1. Accept the proposal of the NKVD on the transfer of the remaining pending investigative files on those arrested in the K.R. national contingents, according to the orders of the NKVD of the USSR NN 00485, 00439 and 00593 - 1937 and NN 302 and 326 - 1938, for consideration by Special Troikas on the ground.
2. Special Troikas are formed as part of: the first secretary of the regional committee, the regional committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks or the Central Committee of the National Communist Parties, the Head of the relevant department of the NKVD and the Prosecutor of the region, territory, republic.
In the Ukrainian and Kazakh SSRs and the Far East Territory, Special Troikas are formed by regions.
3. Special Troikas consider cases in relation to persons arrested only before August 1, 1938, and complete their work within 2 months.
4. Cases against all persons indicated nat. k.-r. contingents arrested after August 1, 1938, be sent for consideration to the appropriate judicial bodies, according to jurisdiction (Military Tribunals, Linear and Regional Courts, the Military Collegium of the Supreme Court), as well as to the Special Meeting at the NKVD of the USSR.
5. Grant the right to Special Troikas to pronounce sentences in accordance with the order of the NKVD of the USSR N 00485 of August 25, 1937 in the first and second categories, as well as to return cases for further investigation and make decisions on the release of the accused from custody, if there are no cases in the cases sufficient evidence to convict the accused.
6. Decisions of the Special Threes in the first category must be implemented IMMEDIATELY.
Estimates of the number of victims of Stalin's repressions differ dramatically. Some call numbers in the tens of millions of people, others are limited to hundreds of thousands. Which of them is closer to the truth?
Who is guilty?
Today our society is almost equally divided into Stalinists and anti-Stalinists. The former draw attention to the positive transformations that took place in the country during the Stalin era, the latter urge not to forget about the huge numbers of victims of the repressions of the Stalinist regime.
However, almost all Stalinists recognize the fact of repressions, however, they note their limited nature and even justify them with political necessity. Moreover, they often do not associate repressions with the name of Stalin.
Historian Nikolay Kopesov writes that in the majority of investigative cases on those repressed in 1937-1938 there were no resolutions of Stalin - everywhere there were sentences of Yagoda, Yezhov and Beria. According to the Stalinists, this is evidence that the heads of the punitive organs were engaged in arbitrariness and, in confirmation, they quote Yezhov: “Who we want, we execute, whom we want, we have mercy.”
For that part of the Russian public that sees Stalin as the ideologist of repression, these are just particulars that confirm the rule. Yagoda, Yezhov and many other arbiters of human destinies themselves became victims of terror. Who but Stalin was behind all this? they ask rhetorically.
Doctor of Historical Sciences, chief specialist of the State Archives of the Russian Federation Oleg Khlevnyuk notes that despite the fact that Stalin's signature was not on many hit lists, it was he who sanctioned almost all mass political repression.
Who got hurt?
Even more significant in the controversy surrounding the Stalinist repressions was the question of the victims. Who and in what capacity suffered during the period of Stalinism? Many researchers note that the very concept of “victims of repression” is rather vague. Historiography has not worked out clear definitions on this matter.
Undoubtedly, convicts, imprisoned in prisons and camps, shot, deported, deprived of property should be counted among the victims of the actions of the authorities. But what about, for example, those who were subjected to "hard interrogations" and then released? Should there be a separation between criminal and political prisoners? In what category should we classify the “nonsense” caught in petty single thefts and equated with state criminals?
The deportees deserve special attention. To what category do they belong - repressed or administratively deported? It is even more difficult to decide on those who fled without waiting for dispossession or deportation. They were sometimes caught, but someone was lucky enough to start a new life.
Such different numbers
Uncertainty in the issue of who is responsible for the repressions, in identifying the categories of victims and the period for which the victims of repressions should be counted lead to completely different figures. The most impressive figures came from the economist Ivan Kurganov (referenced by Solzhenitsyn in his novel The Gulag Archipelago), who calculated that between 1917 and 1959, 110 million people became victims of the internal war of the Soviet regime against its own people.
This number of mounds includes victims of famine, collectivization, peasant exile, camps, executions, civil war, as well as the "disdainful and sloppy conduct of World War II".
Even if such calculations are correct, can these figures be considered a reflection of Stalin's repressions? The economist, in fact, answers this question himself, using the expression "victims of the internal war of the Soviet regime." It is worth noting that Kurganov counted only the dead. It is difficult to imagine what figure could have appeared if the economist had taken into account all the victims of the Soviet regime in the specified period.
The figures cited by the head of the human rights society "Memorial" Arseniy Roginsky are more realistic. He writes: “On the scale of the entire Soviet Union, 12.5 million people are considered victims of political repression,” but at the same time he adds that up to 30 million people can be considered repressed in a broad sense.
The leaders of the Yabloko movement, Elena Kriven and Oleg Naumov, counted all categories of victims of the Stalinist regime, including those who died in the camps from diseases and harsh working conditions, the dispossessed, the victims of hunger, those who suffered from unjustifiably cruel decrees and received excessively severe punishment for minor offenses in the force of the repressive nature of the legislation. The final figure is 39 million.
Researcher Ivan Gladilin notes on this occasion that if the number of victims of repression has been counted since 1921, this means that it is not Stalin who is responsible for a significant part of the crimes, but the “Lenin Guard”, which immediately after the October Revolution unleashed terror against the White Guards , clergy and kulaks.
How to count?
Estimates of the number of victims of repression vary greatly depending on the method of counting. If we take into account those convicted only under political articles, then according to the data of the regional departments of the KGB of the USSR, given in 1988, Soviet authorities(VChK, GPU, OGPU, NKVD, NKGB, MGB) 4,308,487 people were arrested, of which 835,194 were shot.
Employees of the "Memorial" society, when counting the victims of political trials, are close to these figures, although their figures are still noticeably higher - 4.5-4.8 million were convicted, of which 1.1 million were shot. If we consider everyone who went through the Gulag system as victims of the Stalinist regime, then this figure, according to various estimates, will range from 15 to 18 million people.
Very often, Stalinist repressions are associated exclusively with the concept of the "Great Terror", which peaked in 1937-1938. According to the commission headed by academician Pyotr Pospelov to establish the causes of mass repressions, the following figures were announced: 1,548,366 people were arrested on charges of anti-Soviet activities, of which 681,692 thousand were sentenced to capital punishment.
One of the most authoritative experts on the demographic aspects of political repression in the USSR, historian Viktor Zemskov, names a smaller number of those convicted during the years of the Great Terror - 1,344,923 people, although his data coincides with the number of those who were shot.
If the dispossessed kulaks are included in the number of those subjected to repressions in Stalin's time, then the figure will grow by at least 4 million people. Such a number of dispossessed is given by the same Zemskov. The Yabloko party agrees with this, noting that about 600,000 of them died in exile.
The victims of Stalinist repressions were also representatives of some peoples who were subjected to forcible deportation - Germans, Poles, Finns, Karachays, Kalmyks, Armenians, Chechens, Ingush, Balkars, Crimean Tatars. Many historians agree that total number about 6 million people were deported, while about 1.2 million people did not live to see the end of the journey.
Trust or not?
The above figures are mostly based on the reports of the OGPU, NKVD, MGB. However, not all documents of the punitive departments have been preserved, many of them were purposefully destroyed, many are still in the public domain.
It should be recognized that historians are very dependent on statistics collected by various special agencies. But the difficulty is that even the available information reflects only the officially repressed, and therefore, by definition, cannot be complete. Moreover, it is possible to verify it from primary sources only in the rarest cases.
Acute lack of reliable and complete information often provoked both the Stalinists and their opponents to name radically different figures from each other in favor of their position. “If the “rights” exaggerated the scale of the repressions, then the “lefts”, partly from dubious youth, having found much more modest figures in the archives, were in a hurry to make them public and did not always ask themselves whether everything was reflected - and could be reflected - in the archives ", - notes the historian Nikolai Koposov.
It can be stated that estimates of the scale of Stalinist repressions based on the sources available to us can be very approximate. Documents stored in the federal archives would be a good help for modern researchers, but many of them were subjected to re-classification. A country with such a history will jealously guard the secrets of its past.
Stalinist repressions:
What was it?
To the Day of Remembrance of Victims of Political Repressions
In this material, we have collected the memories of eyewitnesses, fragments from official documents, figures and facts provided by researchers in order to provide answers to questions that excite our society again and again. Russian state could not give clear answers to these questions, so until now, everyone is forced to look for answers on their own.
Who was affected by the repression
Under the flywheel of Stalinist repression fell representatives of the most different groups population. The most famous are the names of artists, Soviet leaders and military leaders. About peasants and workers often only the names from the execution lists and camp archives are known. They did not write memoirs, tried unnecessarily not to recall the camp past, their relatives often refused them. The presence of a convicted relative often meant an end to a career, study, because the children of arrested workers, dispossessed peasants might not know the truth about what happened to their parents.
When we heard about another arrest, we never asked, “Why was he taken?”, but there were few like us. Crazed with fear, people asked each other this question for pure self-consolation: they take people for something, which means they won’t take me, because there’s nothing for it! They refined themselves, coming up with reasons and justifications for each arrest, - “She really is a smuggler”, “He allowed himself such a thing”, “I myself heard him say ...” And one more thing: “You should have expected this - he has such terrible character”, “It always seemed to me that something was wrong with him”, “This is a complete stranger”. That is why the question: “Why did they take him?” has become taboo for us. It's time to understand that people are taken for nothing.
- Nadezhda Mandelstam , writer and wife of Osip Mandelstam
From the very beginning of terror to this day, attempts have not stopped to present it as a fight against "sabotage", enemies of the fatherland, limiting the composition of the victims to certain classes hostile to the state - kulaks, bourgeois, priests. The victims of terror were depersonalized and turned into "contingents" (Poles, spies, wreckers, counter-revolutionary elements). However, political terror was total in nature, and representatives of all groups of the population of the USSR became its victims: “the cause of engineers”, “the cause of doctors”, persecution of scientists and entire areas in science, personnel purges in the army before and after the war, deportation of entire peoples.
Poet Osip Mandelstam
He died in transit, the place of death is not known for certain.
Directed by Vsevolod Meyerhold
Marshals of the Soviet Union
Tukhachevsky (executed), Voroshilov, Egorov (executed), Budeny, Blucher (died in Lefortovo prison).
How many people were hurt
According to the estimates of the Memorial Society, there were 4.5-4.8 million people convicted for political reasons, 1.1 million people were shot.
Estimates of the number of victims of repression vary and depend on the method of counting. If we take into account only those convicted under political articles, then according to the analysis of the statistics of the regional departments of the KGB of the USSR, carried out in 1988, the bodies of the Cheka-GPU-OGPU-NKVD-NKGB-MGB arrested 4,308,487 people, of which 835,194 were shot. According to the same data, about 1.76 million people died in the camps. According to the estimates of the Memorial Society, there were more people convicted for political reasons - 4.5-4.8 million people, of which 1.1 million people were shot.
The victims of Stalinist repressions were representatives of some peoples who were subjected to forcible deportation (Germans, Poles, Finns, Karachays, Kalmyks, Chechens, Ingush, Balkars, Crimean Tatars and others). This is about 6 million people. One in five did not live to see the end of the journey - about 1.2 million people died during the difficult conditions of the deportations. During dispossession, about 4 million peasants suffered, of which at least 600 thousand died in exile.
In general, about 39 million people suffered as a result of Stalin's policies. The victims of repression include those who died in the camps from disease and harsh working conditions, the dispossessed, the victims of hunger, the victims of the unjustifiably cruel decrees "on absenteeism" and "on three spikelets" and other groups of the population who received excessively severe punishment for minor offenses due to repressive the nature of the legislation and the consequences of that time.
Why was it necessary?
The worst thing is not that you are suddenly suddenly taken away from a warm, well-established life, not Kolyma and Magadan, and hard labor. At first, a person desperately hopes for a misunderstanding, for a mistake by the investigators, then painfully waits for them to call, apologize, and let them go home, to their children and husband. And then the victim no longer hopes, does not painfully search for an answer to the question of who needs all this, then there is a primitive struggle for life. The worst thing is the meaninglessness of what is happening ... Does anyone know what it was for?
Evgenia Ginzburg,
writer and journalist
In July 1928, speaking at the Plenum of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks, Joseph Stalin described the need to fight "foreign elements" as follows: "As we move forward, the resistance of the capitalist elements will increase, the class struggle will intensify, and Soviet power, forces which will grow more and more, will pursue a policy of isolating these elements, a policy of disintegrating the enemies of the working class, and finally, a policy of suppressing the resistance of the exploiters, creating a basis for the further advance of the working class and the bulk of the peasantry.
In 1937, the People's Commissar of Internal Affairs of the USSR N. Yezhov published order No. 00447, in accordance with which a large-scale campaign to destroy "anti-Soviet elements" began. They were recognized as the culprits of all the failures of the Soviet leadership: “Anti-Soviet elements are the main instigators of all kinds of anti-Soviet and sabotage crimes, both on collective farms and state farms, and in transport, and in some areas of industry. The state security organs are faced with the task of crushing this entire gang of anti-Soviet elements in the most merciless way, protecting the working Soviet people from their counter-revolutionary intrigues, and finally, once and for all, putting an end to their vile subversive work against the foundations of the Soviet state. In accordance with this, I order - from August 5, 1937, in all republics, territories and regions, to begin an operation to repress former kulaks, active anti-Soviet elements and criminals. This document marks the beginning of an era of large-scale political repression, which later became known as the Great Terror.
Stalin and other members of the Politburo (V. Molotov, L. Kaganovich, K. Voroshilov) personally compiled and signed execution lists - pre-trial circulars listing the number or names of victims to be convicted by the Military Collegium of the Supreme Court with a predetermined punishment. According to researchers, under the death sentences of at least 44.5 thousand people are Stalin's personal signatures and resolutions.
The myth of the effective manager Stalin
Until now, in the media and even in textbooks, one can find the justification of political terror in the USSR by the need for industrialization in a short time. Since the release of the decree obliging convicts to serve their sentences in forced labor camps for more than 3 years, prisoners have been actively involved in the construction of various infrastructure facilities. In 1930, the Main Directorate of Correctional Labor Camps of the OGPU (GULAG) was created and huge flows of prisoners were sent to key construction sites. During the existence of this system, from 15 to 18 million people have passed through it.
During the 1930-1950s, the construction of the White Sea-Baltic Canal, the Moscow Canal, was carried out by the forces of the Gulag prisoners. The prisoners built the Uglich, Rybinsk, Kuibyshev and other hydroelectric power stations, erected metallurgical plants, facilities of the Soviet nuclear program, the longest railways and freeways. Gulag prisoners built dozens of Soviet cities (Komsomolsk-on-Amur, Dudinka, Norilsk, Vorkuta, Novokuibyshevsk and many others).
Beria himself characterized the labor efficiency of the prisoners as low: “The existing ration of 2,000 calories in the Gulag is designed for a person who is in prison and not working. In practice, this underestimated norm is also released by supplying organizations only by 65-70%. Therefore, a significant percentage of the camp labor force falls into the category of weak and useless people in production. In general, the labor force is used no more than 60-65 percent.”
To the question "Is Stalin needed?" we can only give one answer - a firm "no". Even without taking into account the tragic consequences of famine, repression and terror, even considering only the economic costs and benefits - and even making every possible assumption in favor of Stalin - we get results that clearly show that Stalin's economic policy did not lead to positive results. Forced redistribution significantly worsened productivity and social welfare.
- Sergei Guriev , economist
The economic efficiency of Stalinist industrialization by the hands of prisoners is extremely lowly assessed by modern economists. Sergei Guriev cites the following figures: by the end of the 1930s, productivity in agriculture had only reached the pre-revolutionary level, while in industry it was one and a half times lower than in 1928. Industrialization led to huge losses in welfare (minus 24%).
Brave new world
Stalinism is not only a system of repression, it is also the moral degradation of society. The Stalinist system made tens of millions of slaves - morally broke people. One of the most terrible texts that I have read in my life is the tortured "confessions" of the great biologist Academician Nikolai Vavilov. Only a few can endure torture. But many - tens of millions! – were broken and became moral freaks out of fear of being personally repressed.
- Alexey Yablokov , corresponding member of the Russian Academy of Sciences
Philosopher and historian of totalitarianism Hannah Arendt explains that in order to turn Lenin's revolutionary dictatorship into a fully totalitarian government, Stalin had to artificially create an atomized society. For this, an atmosphere of fear was created in the USSR, and whistleblowing was encouraged. Totalitarianism did not destroy real "enemies", but imaginary ones, and this is its terrible difference from ordinary dictatorship. None of the destroyed sections of society were hostile to the regime and probably would not become hostile in the foreseeable future.
In order to destroy all social and family ties, the repressions were carried out in such a way as to threaten the same fate of the accused and everyone in the most ordinary relations with him, from casual acquaintances to closest friends and relatives. This policy penetrated deeply into Soviet society, where people, out of selfish interests or fearing for their lives, betrayed neighbors, friends, even members of their own families. In their desire for self-preservation, the masses of people abandoned their own interests, and became, on the one hand, a victim of power, and on the other, its collective embodiment.
The corollary of the simple and ingenious device of "guilt for association with the enemy" is such that, as soon as a person is accused, his former friends immediately turn into his worst enemies: in order to save their own skin, they hasten to jump out with unsolicited information and denunciations, supplying non-existent data against accused. Ultimately, it was by developing this device to its latest and most fantastic extremes that the Bolshevik rulers succeeded in creating an atomized and fragmented society, the like of which we had never seen before, and whose events and catastrophes in such pure form unlikely to have happened without it.
- Hannah Arendt, philosopher
The deep disunity of Soviet society, the absence of civil institutions were inherited and new Russia have become one of the fundamental problems hindering the creation of democracy and civil peace in our country.
How the state and society fought the legacy of Stalinism
To date, Russia has experienced "two and a half attempts at de-Stalinization." The first and largest was deployed by N. Khrushchev. It began with a report at the 20th Congress of the CPSU:
“They arrested without the sanction of the prosecutor... What else could be a sanction when everything was allowed by Stalin. He was the chief prosecutor in these matters. Stalin gave not only permission, but also instructions on arrests on his own initiative. Stalin was a very suspicious person, with morbid suspicion, as we were convinced while working with him. He could look at a person and say: “something your eyes are running around today,” or: “why do you often turn away today, don’t look directly into your eyes.” Painful suspicion led him to sweeping distrust. Everywhere and everywhere he saw "enemies", "double-dealers", "spies". Having unlimited power, he allowed cruel arbitrariness, suppressed a person morally and physically. When Stalin said that such and such should be arrested, one should have taken it on faith that he was an "enemy of the people." And the gang of Beria, who was in charge of the state security organs, climbed out of their skin to prove the guilt of the arrested persons, the correctness of the materials they fabricated. And what evidence was put into play? Confessions of the arrested. And the investigators got these "confessions".
As a result of the fight against the cult of personality, sentences were revised, more than 88 thousand prisoners were rehabilitated. Nevertheless, the era of the “thaw” that came after these events turned out to be very short-lived. Soon, many dissidents who disagree with the policy of the Soviet leadership will become victims of political persecution.
The second wave of de-Stalinization occurred in the late 80s - early 90s. Only then did the public become aware of at least approximate figures characterizing the scale of the Stalinist terror. At this time, sentences passed in the 30s and 40s were also reviewed. In most cases, the convicted were rehabilitated. Half a century later, posthumously dispossessed peasants were rehabilitated.
A timid attempt at a new de-Stalinization was made during the presidency of Dmitry Medvedev. However, it did not bring significant results. Rosarkhiv, at the direction of the president, posted on its website documents about 20,000 Poles shot by the NKVD near Katyn.
Programs to preserve the memory of the victims are being phased out due to lack of funding.
Estimates of the number of victims of Stalin's repressions differ dramatically. Some call numbers in the tens of millions of people, others are limited to hundreds of thousands. Which of them is closer to the truth?
Who is guilty?
Today our society is almost equally divided into Stalinists and anti-Stalinists. The former draw attention to the positive transformations that took place in the country during the Stalin era, the latter urge not to forget about the huge numbers of victims of the repressions of the Stalinist regime.
However, almost all Stalinists recognize the fact of repressions, however, they note their limited nature and even justify them with political necessity. Moreover, they often do not associate repressions with the name of Stalin.
Historian Nikolay Kopesov writes that in the majority of investigative cases on those repressed in 1937-1938 there were no resolutions of Stalin - everywhere there were sentences of Yagoda, Yezhov and Beria. According to the Stalinists, this is evidence that the heads of the punitive organs were engaged in arbitrariness and, in confirmation, they quote Yezhov: “Who we want, we execute, whom we want, we have mercy.”
For that part of the Russian public that sees Stalin as the ideologist of repression, these are just particulars that confirm the rule. Yagoda, Yezhov and many other arbiters of human destinies themselves became victims of terror. Who but Stalin was behind all this? they ask rhetorically.
Doctor of Historical Sciences, chief specialist of the State Archives of the Russian Federation Oleg Khlevnyuk notes that despite the fact that Stalin's signature was not on many hit lists, it was he who sanctioned almost all mass political repressions.
Who got hurt?
Even more significant in the controversy surrounding the Stalinist repressions was the question of the victims. Who and in what capacity suffered during the period of Stalinism? Many researchers note that the very concept of “victims of repression” is rather vague. Historiography has not worked out clear definitions on this matter.
Undoubtedly, convicts, imprisoned in prisons and camps, shot, deported, deprived of property should be counted among the victims of the actions of the authorities. But what about, for example, those who were subjected to "hard interrogations" and then released? Should there be a separation between criminal and political prisoners? In what category should we classify the “nonsense” caught in petty single thefts and equated with state criminals?
The deportees deserve special attention. To what category do they belong - repressed or administratively deported? It is even more difficult to decide on those who fled without waiting for dispossession or deportation. They were sometimes caught, but someone was lucky enough to start a new life.
Such different numbers
Uncertainty in the issue of who is responsible for the repressions, in identifying the categories of victims and the period for which the victims of repressions should be counted lead to completely different figures. The most impressive figures came from the economist Ivan Kurganov (referenced by Solzhenitsyn in his novel The Gulag Archipelago), who calculated that between 1917 and 1959, 110 million people became victims of the internal war of the Soviet regime against its own people.
This number Kurganov includes the victims of famine, collectivization, peasant exile, camps, executions, civil war, as well as "the neglectful and slovenly conduct of the Second World War."
Even if such calculations are correct, can these figures be considered a reflection of Stalin's repressions? The economist, in fact, answers this question himself, using the expression "victims of the internal war of the Soviet regime." It is worth noting that Kurganov counted only the dead. It is difficult to imagine what figure could have appeared if the economist had taken into account all the victims of the Soviet regime in the specified period.
The figures cited by the head of the human rights society "Memorial" Arseniy Roginsky are more realistic. He writes: “On the scale of the entire Soviet Union, 12.5 million people are considered victims of political repression,” but at the same time he adds that up to 30 million people can be considered repressed in a broad sense.
The leaders of the Yabloko movement, Elena Kriven and Oleg Naumov, counted all categories of victims of the Stalinist regime, including those who died in the camps from diseases and harsh working conditions, the dispossessed, the victims of hunger, those who suffered from unjustifiably cruel decrees and received excessively severe punishment for minor offenses in the force of the repressive nature of the legislation. The final figure is 39 million.
Researcher Ivan Gladilin notes on this occasion that if the number of victims of repression has been counted since 1921, this means that it is not Stalin who is responsible for a significant part of the crimes, but the “Lenin Guard”, which immediately after the October Revolution unleashed terror against the White Guards , clergy and kulaks.
How to count?
Estimates of the number of victims of repression vary greatly depending on the method of counting. If we take into account those convicted only under political articles, then according to the data of the regional departments of the KGB of the USSR, given in 1988, the Soviet authorities (VChK, GPU, OGPU, NKVD, NKGB, MGB) arrested 4,308,487 people, of which 835,194 were shot.
Employees of the "Memorial" society, when counting the victims of political trials, are close to these figures, although their figures are still noticeably higher - 4.5-4.8 million were convicted, of which 1.1 million were shot. If we consider everyone who went through the Gulag system as victims of the Stalinist regime, then this figure, according to various estimates, will range from 15 to 18 million people.
Very often, Stalinist repressions are associated exclusively with the concept of the "Great Terror", which peaked in 1937-1938. According to the commission headed by academician Pyotr Pospelov to establish the causes of mass repressions, the following figures were announced: 1,548,366 people were arrested on charges of anti-Soviet activities, of which 681,692 thousand were sentenced to capital punishment.
One of the most authoritative experts on the demographic aspects of political repression in the USSR, historian Viktor Zemskov, names a smaller number of those convicted during the years of the Great Terror - 1,344,923 people, although his data coincides with the number of those who were shot.
If the dispossessed kulaks are included in the number of those subjected to repressions in Stalin's time, then the figure will grow by at least 4 million people. Such a number of dispossessed is given by the same Zemskov. The Yabloko party agrees with this, noting that about 600,000 of them died in exile.
The victims of Stalinist repressions were also representatives of some peoples who were subjected to forcible deportation - Germans, Poles, Finns, Karachays, Kalmyks, Armenians, Chechens, Ingush, Balkars, Crimean Tatars. Many historians agree that the total number of deportees is about 6 million people, while about 1.2 million people did not live to see the end of the journey.
Trust or not?
The above figures are mostly based on the reports of the OGPU, NKVD, MGB. However, not all documents of the punitive departments have been preserved, many of them were purposefully destroyed, many are still in the public domain.
It should be recognized that historians are very dependent on statistics collected by various special agencies. But the difficulty is that even the available information reflects only the officially repressed, and therefore, by definition, cannot be complete. Moreover, it is possible to verify it from primary sources only in the rarest cases.
The acute shortage of reliable and complete information often provoked both the Stalinists and their opponents to name radically different figures in favor of their position. “If the “rights” exaggerated the scale of the repressions, then the “lefts”, partly from dubious youth, having found much more modest figures in the archives, were in a hurry to make them public and did not always ask themselves whether everything was reflected - and could be reflected - in the archives ", - notes the historian Nikolai Koposov.
It can be stated that estimates of the scale of Stalinist repressions based on the sources available to us can be very approximate. Documents stored in the federal archives would be a good help for modern researchers, but many of them were subjected to re-classification. A country with such a history will jealously guard the secrets of its past.