Kruschev?

[Nanatsu Yoru]

What are the opinions of him here? I know what the MLs are going to say (:rolleyes:), but what about everyone else? To me, it seems he did both good and bad in Russia. Then again, the sources I've been reading from in the last 10 minutes might not be exactly unbiased. So? What's the story?

[RedSunRising]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1965_Soviet_economic_reform

The wikipedia article on the economic changes (dismantlement of the socialist economy) are a good place to start.

[bailey_187]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1965_Soviet_economic_reform

The wikipedia article on the economic changes (dismantlement of the socialist economy) are a good place to start.

:confused: Krushechev was out of power by then, and IIRC Kosygin was anti-Krushchev.

[Tommy4ever]

Well, I have a reasonably positive view of him. He ended the terror of Stalinism (just look at the decline in gulag population for evidence), rallied against the Stalinist cult of personality, refocussed the Soviet economy towards improving the lives of its people - his home building programmes being most well known, he of course oversaw those great space programmes (although I'm not sure if we can praise Khruschev himself for that), ended the occupation of Austria, supported the Cuban revolution (likely saving it in the end) and had a foriegn policy that may well have saved the world from nuclear war during a tense time.

Negatives: reintroduced capitalist elements, had several failed economic policies, was socially conservative (styfling art for example), didn't handle the Cuban Missile Crisis very well at all, Sino-Soviet split, The invasion of HUngary, appeared to be a bit naive at times.

I say, especially compared to what came before and after, Khruschev was a good leader for the Soviet Union.

[DaringMehring]

Khruschev regime achievements:
1) temporarily managed to shift production away from heavy industry/military toward standard of living and consumer goods.
2) release of gulag prisoners.

Failures:
1) "De-Stalinization" didn't extend to overthrowing the bureaucratization of Stalin regime
2) May have released many from the gulag, but took into custody a new set of people.
3) Formalized "socialism in one country" into what it had always meant, peaceful coexistence with capitalism.

Marxists should always look at the social basis of a regime and it is clear that there was no major rupture between Stalin-Khruschev in that the main power behind both was the bureaucracy. However it was a different wing of the bureaucracy with different ideas about how to achieve socialism (to the extent they cared about that) and secure their own positions.

When Khruschev's regime was supplanted by Brezhnev's regime the military bureaucracy reasserted itself and the move toward consumer goods was canceled. This was a disaster with 50% of GDP going to the military and associated industries at one point in the Brezhnev regime rule. We can say that, while all three of Stalin, Khruschev, and Brezhnev represented the power of the bureaucracy, all three put this into play in a different way, with varying results; much like some capitalist regimes are better than others, despite them all representing the bourgeoisie.

[RedSunRising]

:confused: Krushechev was out of power by then, and IIRC Kosygin was anti-Krushchev.

He was appointed by krushechev as Chairman of the State Planning committee. Those "reforms" were the purpose behind Krushechev's attacks on Stalin's legacy and suppression of Marxist-Leninists.

[Queercommie Girl]

Well, I have a reasonably positive view of him. He ended the terror of Stalinism


Aren't you a bit suspicious at least that he was very pro-Stalin before Stalin died and suddenly shifted 180 degrees and became very anti-Stalin after the latter's death? :rolleyes:

I'm not a Trotskyist formally, nor do I completely reject Stalin, but at least Trotsky's views on Stalin were consistent.



Negatives: reintroduced capitalist elements, had several failed economic policies, was socially conservative (styfling art for example), didn't handle the Cuban Missile Crisis very well at all, Sino-Soviet split, The invasion of HUngary, appeared to be a bit naive at times.
He also shot protesting workers. The Soviet bureaucracy became more and more corrupt from his time onwards, the size of the "shadow economy" grew, and economic inequality increased.

And for all his criticisms of Stalin, he never actually did what really mattered - he never introduced worker's democracy in any sense at all.

(Of course, this is intrinsically linked with a critique based on "personality" instead of a systematic critique of the then existing Soviet system)

[RedSunRising]

I'm not a Trotskyist formally, nor do I completely reject Stalin, but at least Trotsky's views on Stalin were consistent.


Most Trotskyitsts arent Trotskyists formally.

And Trotsky's views on Stalin were far from consistent in fact that they were mainly him saying anything CPUSSR friendly CPs were doing was wrong.

[Queercommie Girl]

Most Trotskyitsts arent Trotskyists formally.

And Trotsky's views on Stalin were far from consistent in fact that they were mainly him saying anything CPUSSR friendly CPs were doing was wrong.

Agree (to some extent) with the first point, disagree with the second.

[Tommy4ever]

Can you blame Khruschev for being afraid of Stalin. :rolleyes:

I think a mixture of fear, careerism and perhaps agreeing with Stalin to some extent but thinking he went too far accounts for Khruschev's U-Turn after Stalin's death.

[Sperm-Doll Setsuna]

Can you blame Khruschev for being afraid of Stalin. :rolleyes:

I think a mixture of fear, careerism and perhaps agreeing with Stalin to some extent but thinking he went too far accounts for Khruschev's U-Turn after Stalin's death.

More like he was an opportunist, and a populist.

He did achieve some good things, most notable the new housing policy (which was actually continued during the Brezhnev-era) and the rejection of Lysenkoism, but also worth noting is that quite a few of Khrushchev's policies would have been impossible without the heritage of the Stalin-era.

[Queercommie Girl]

Can you blame Khruschev for being afraid of Stalin. :rolleyes:


So simply "afraid to die" is now a valid excuse for political opportunism. :rolleyes:



I think a mixture of fear, careerism


The bolded sections are qualities that genuine socialists should not possess.

[Tommy4ever]

Real commies don't care about themselves and isn't afraid of anything.

[Jose Gracchus]

They're simply wrong. The Stalinist economic model was already being dismantled in the early 50s and the Kosygin reform was an inevitable step in an authoritarian, anti-proletarian democracy system accommodating the need for more consumer good production and less outright terror and coercion driving the system. Most of the creature comforts the selfsame MLs praise about the USSR were implemented following Khrushchev and many of these basic reforms, like the minimum wage, extensive modern housing, etc. This was inevitable to moving away from the coercive economy and the Khrushchev denunciation of Stalin's legacy in limited terms had nothing to do with this. That's simply a Maoist fabrication. You can't listen to them about economics - Mao's China is about the most embarrassing story in growth a ML command economy ever had. Never came even close to the Stalin-Khrushchev substantial growth rates, hence the turn conventional capitalism much earlier [starting under Mao, not Deng, but accelerated under the latter], which to this day has left much of the interior behind [versus the fSU, which obviously became more developed].

[Tomhet]

I have no actual opinion as I don't see how he benefits the modern working class..

[Die Neue Zeit]

Mao's China is about the most embarrassing story in growth a ML command economy ever had. Never came even close to the Stalin-Khrushchev substantial growth rates, hence the turn conventional capitalism much earlier [starting under Mao, not Deng, but accelerated under the latter], which to this day has left much of the interior behind [versus the fSU, which obviously became more developed].

It's interesting you compared China's interior to Russia's interior.