NationStates Jolt Archive

i've been doing some research into the matter for my degree recently and it turns out, as far as i can see, that the reason for the collapse of the USSR was nothing like what i was told to think it was, or what the popularised reasons may be. i'm not gonna say what i've found just yet cos i'd like to see what other people (from different parts of the world) think or are told what the reason is :)

so.... why did the USSR collapse?

David Hasselhoff (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/3465301.stm)

It was a combination of David Hasselhoff (his hair more than anyhthing), and America constructing more and more nuclear weapons so that Russia felt it had to keep building them to keep up with the arms race, thus not having enough money to put into other areas of its existence.... as far as I can see.

Russia was fine until the nuclear arms race began; it even out-industrialised America under Stalin.

The USSR fell?!? When the shit did this happen? Damn i need to stop drinking...

A better question would be: Why did it take the U.S.S.R. so long to fall? The answer: massive U.S. aid and trade.

Stalin's insanity

Damn you english being my secondary language :headbang:

USSR wasn't a communist country, not even close. But it was more or less
different than rest of the world. So for the sake of world economy it could not work. All those
'rules' that banned importing technology to USSR wasn't cause Usa was afraid
USSR getting weapon tecnology or something. It was 'cause that kind of
economy politics just was allowed to work. Poorly managed economy inside
USSR helped ofcource.

All in all it was just integroing(sp?) a huge market 'area' (200000000 people,
enormous recources) into world wide capitalizt economy. We are talking about
thousands of billions of dollars, if not more...

My understanding was that greed got in, as it normally does, and the orginal production quota systems were abused to ensure they were allways reached.

Russia fell as a direct result of losing the cold war.

However, if we want to examine the indirect causes of its demise, I believe it can be traced to Stalin. When Stalin abandoned the true communist path promoted by Lenin and Trotsky, he sealed the fate of his nation. Instead of establishing the classless society envisioned by the great communist intellectuals, he established the Bolsheviks as the new Bourgeois. In abandoning the communist ideals, he doomed his country to failure.

All those
'rules' that banned importing technology to USSR

There were no such rules. Over 90% of USSR technology was made by the U.S.A. or Western Europe (mostly the Federal Republic of Germany, a.k.a. West Germany).

Russia fell as a direct result of losing the cold war.

However, if we want to examine the indirect causes of its demise, I believe it can be traced to Stalin. When Stalin abandoned the true communist path promoted by Lenin and Trotsky, he sealed the fate of his nation. Instead of establishing the classless society envisioned by the great communist intellectuals, he established the Bolsheviks as the new Bourgeois. In abandoning the communist ideals, he doomed his country to failure.

seconded

us aid and trade? when did that happen?
if anything the ussr was severely undermined by the us and the trade restrictions it enforced. that and the fact following ww2 they refused the ussr any aid despite the handouts it gave to europe.

us aid and trade? when did that happen?
if anything the ussr was severely undermined by the us and the trade restrictions it enforced. that and the fact following ww2 they refused the ussr any aid despite the handouts it gave to europe.

When did it happen? Throughout the entire (phony) Cold War.

It started when Gorbatshev became leader. He tried to renew USSR's economy with Perestroika and glasnost but it was too late. Non-Russian speaking territories wanted to get out of USSR and become intependent. Latvia and Lithuania got their independency back in 1990, Estonia a year later. Conservatives tried organize a revolution but failed (and lost their support amongst people). Russians chose Jeltsin as their new leader. More countries became independent and finally in the end of 1991 USSR ceased to exist.

When did it happen? Throughout the entire (phony) Cold War.

hmm if you say so..

The following books are extremely helpful:

1.Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution by Antony Sutton
2.Western Technology and Soviet Economic Development by Antony Sutton
3.National Suicide: Military Aid to the Soviet Union by Antony Sutton
4.The Best Enemy Money Can Buy by Antony Sutton
5.Survival is Not Enough by Professor Richard Pipes

Your mom :eek: :D

There were no such rules. Over 90% of USSR technology was made by the U.S.A. or Western Europe (mostly the Federal Republic of Germany, a.k.a. West Germany).


I'm pretty sure there where 'rules'. I'm not saying they worked...
I'm not all that familiar with this part of history.

Lack of corruption.

When anti-corrutption legislation was passed the insane bureaucracy of the system was made mandatory. When people could no longer just bribe local officials to get necessities at a reasonable pace, they no longer could stand the system. Just look at Russia today, its totally corrupt.

all but one are by the same author, its not exactly gonna give a balanced view

Hasselhoff has had 10 albums released in Germany... I think its a compelling case.

I am a Russian, so maybe I have a unique prospective to this. There are so many factors to why the USSR fell, some created by our own leaders, some created by the West.

The first I want to point out is that Afghanistan was Czechloslovakia run amiss. We all know how destabilizing loosing a war can be. The United States was close to anarchy during the Vietnam years.

State leaders were old dinosaurs that did not understand the fundementals of economics. The reforms put out by Gorby were very controversial and lead to political strife, culminating in the coup.

The West and China for that matter did everything they could (and still do today) to encircle Russia. Many wonder why Russia has this "seige mentality, its because we are being geo-politically strangled by the West. Back then they tried to keep us out of Afghanistan, nowadays they are in Iraq, Afghanistan, going east into Ukraine (many veiw this country as sacred and an affront to our prestige), and now into Central Asia.

Oh, and lastly, we had no one to counter the prestige and wonderment of Hasselhof.

Ronald Reagan was the man ultimately responsible for the economic followed by the total collapse of the USSR. He simply lowered the price of oil drastically which ruined USSR's economy which was based primarily on oil exports then. Go Texas

It was all part of an elaborate CIA scheme, Gorbachev being a US puppet and his Glasnost policy being fed to him by his overseers at Langley.

And just to ensure you all agree with me... *shoots a random person in the topic*

Worker apathy, ethnic nationalism, Afghanistan, Crime as a result of a fledgling free-market, inefficient and top-down factory organisation (There was a story about a shoe factory that fulfilled more than its quota of shoes- however, they cut corners by only making them for the left foot.), bloated military spending, etc, etc. I wrote a huge essay on it a while back.

The fact that the Soviet government was a dictatorship meant that its economic planners were not accountable to the people. They were only accountable to their superiors in the Communist Party. Therefore, the economy was planned to meet the specifications of party leaders rather than the demands of the people. This worked well for a while, as long as the demands of the party and those of the people were more or less the same. But eventually, corruption started growing (as it always does in one-party states), and the economic plans began to increasingly ignore what the people actually needed (preferring to concentrate on making weapons to win the arms race with the USA, for example). As a result, popular discontent appeared and began to grow. Hoping to solve this problem, Mikhail Gorbachev initiated market-oriented reforms in the mid 80's. But they failed miserabely, turning a tolerable economic downturn into a major crisis, and throwing the Soviet Union into chaos. Leaders like Boris Yeltsin took advantage of the chaos and took over the country. They then dissolved the Soviet Union and started tearing everything apart for personal benefit. As a result, what was once a mighty superpower and the world's 2nd largest economy is now a ruin.

The collapse could have been averted in any number of ways; the best thing to do would have been to make the economic planners accountable to the people - in other words, to turn the Soviet Union into a democracy while preserving its economic model intact. That would have solved the problem that caused the snowball effect in the first place - and besides, true socialism and communism require democracy anyway.

Fundamentally, it's because Communism (and the various incarnations of state enforced societal equality) are diametrically opposed to evolution.

There needs to be a societal mechanism in place for the advancement of the individual over the other members of society. It is natural for a living being to be greedy, to try to assert dominance and increase the chances that the individual's DNA will propogate down through time.

If you amass power and material wealth, you increase the chances of your children (and your childrens' children) passing your DNA down through the generations.

State enforced societal equity attempts to remove this incentive. When one person is more productive than another (either through intelligence, work ethic or whatever), that person doesn't get appropriate advantage in their lives from it. That removes the incentive to excel in your work. Without incentive to excel, people don't work as hard....the economy slows. After time, the economy collapses.

The US increased external pressure on the Soviet economy, preciptating the collapse when it occurred.



Now, this is not to say that the USSR was truly Communist. As pointed out by others in this thread, there was a social power structure that was created by Stalin and propagated through the years to the late 80's. This occurred because of the inherent nature of man....we don't want societal equality. We want a means by which we can have a better life than others have.

Unfortunately, in Stalin's USSR, that did not mean that those who contributed the most to their nation and economy received benefit. Stalin formed a political elite based on fear of death and imprisonment. Stalin, in fact, was inclined to dispose of anyone whom he thought was becoming politically powerful...even if they were allies. This further supressed the drive to excel withing the Soviet power structures.

Ultimately, it all led to state sponsored mediocrity. No incentive to help the economy. No incentive to develop yourself. Significant disincentives to attaining power....it was somewhat dangerous!

This all manifests as a shaky economy, which Reagan saw and put the screws to with the defense spending of the 80's. This caused a forced implosion of the Soviet economy.

Gorbachev saw what was happening and realized that it could not be allowed to continue. A transition needed to occur before desperation led to isolation and then confrontation. He facilitated this by engaging the West, specifically Reagan, which created an environment in which it was 'safe' for the USSR to collapse.

all but one are by the same author, its not exactly gonna give a balanced view

Sutton spent many years researching his books, and most of the sources he consulted were corporate and government (both U.S. and U.S.S.R.) sources.

However, if we want to examine the indirect causes of its demise, I believe it can be traced to Stalin. When Stalin abandoned the true communist path promoted by Lenin and Trotsky, he sealed the fate of his nation. Instead of establishing the classless society envisioned by the great communist intellectuals, he established the Bolsheviks as the new Bourgeois. In abandoning the communist ideals, he doomed his country to failure.

I'd agree...

But as a Stalin fan, I'm going to have to say TO THE GULAG WITH YOU!

When did it happen? Throughout the entire (phony) Cold War.
Yes, it was all a giant conspiracy. :rolleyes:

1. ... by Antony Sutton
2. ... by Antony Sutton
3. ... by Antony Sutton
4. ... by Antony Sutton
Let me guess: Your favourite conspiracy theorist?

Yes, it was all a giant conspiracy. :rolleyes:


Let me guess: Your favourite conspiracy theorist?

As I said above, Sutton drew from mostly government sources (State Department documents, congressional records, etc.), Soviet sources, and corporate sources.

Sutton spent many years researching his books, and most of the sources he consulted were corporate and government (both U.S. and U.S.S.R.) sources.

yeah i'm not attacking his skills as a writer or an intellectual,
i'm just saying that you can't get a balanced view by only reading the work of one person. however many sources he uses and wherever they're from he will still analyse them with his own pre-existing biases. this isn't a fault on his part-its called being human.

Latvia and Lithuania got their independency back in 1990, Estonia a year later.

They all got their independence back at the same time in 1991.


My opinions about this issue... there were a lot of reasons why the USSR collapsed. One was Gorbatchevs presidency; compared to types like Hrutshev and Brezhnev, he was too friendly towards the Americans.

Another reason was that the Baltic states started rebelling. I don't know about Latvia and Lithuania, but I know that the Estonians listened to Finnish news instead of Soviet news and got neutral information that way. They also could listen to their national anthem from our broadcasts, because Finland and Estonia share the same national anthem melody (not words).
Let's not forget that a lot of them invited Finns for a visit to their homes and got real information about outside world that way. But to prevent this from becoming a Finland-praising post, I have to mention that they had their stories about Estonians surviving from prison camps and about people who lived in forest to escape the service in Red Army. What I am trying to say is that their culture and national honor survived even under Soviet oppression.

Back to the topic, I believe that the unsuccesful Afghanistan war also influenced in some way. And the Chernobyl accident probably made the Belarussians and Ukrainians think twice about Soviet Union.

I think the reasons are plain to see (from what I gathered, it sounds like mostly misdistribution of resources and no love from any other countries, though the tendency of bona-fide communism to fail when subjected to human nature should not be understated)...

The sixty-four dollar question is this: What is causing Russia to revert to totalitarianism now? (Specifically, what features of government, culture, and market are allowing Putin to take as much power as he has with no real end in sight?)

I think it was kind of like a chain reaction. Gorbachev came along and did his whole prestroika and glasnost thing, and then Poland became independent. Once everybody had seen it was doable, everyone wanted a piece of the action. All the eastern countries gained independence, one by one, and soon the USSR was no more.

Well that's what I was told, at least.

i've been doing some research into the matter for my degree recently and it turns out, as far as i can see, that the reason for the collapse of the USSR was nothing like what i was told to think it was, or what the popularised reasons may be. i'm not gonna say what i've found just yet cos i'd like to see what other people (from different parts of the world) think or are told what the reason is :)

so.... why did the USSR collapse?
Gawd, ancient history. It was an economic reason, I would presume.

Yes, it was all a giant conspiracy. :rolleyes:

Ask the Shah. Or Chiang Kai-shek. Or Nguyen Van Thieu. Or Somoza. Or Trujillo. Or one of the many, many other anticommunists we betrayed. Here's a nice long reading list for you (I compiled it for a friend, so yes, the ones I already listed are on it)

) I Saw Poland Betrayed (by Arthur Bliss Lane, who was ambassador to Poland at the time)
2) The Fourth Floor (by Earl E.T. Smith, who was the last U.S. ambassador to Cuba)
3) Cuba Betrayed (written by Fulgencio Batista)
4) The Great Betrayal (by Ian Smith)
5) Nicaragua Betrayed (by Anastasio Somoza and Jack Cox)
6) The Politician (by Robert Welch)
7) The Actor (by Alan Stang)
8) The Betrayers (by Phyllis Schlafley and Chester Ward)
9) The Gravediggers (by Phyllis Schlafley and Chester Ward)
10) America's Retreat From Victory: The Story of George Catlett Marshall (by Senator Joseph McCarthy)
11) Why Not Victory? (by Senator Barry Goldwater)
12) Again, May God Forgive Us (by Robert Welch)
13) Henry Kissinger: Soviet Agent (by Frank Cappell)
14) Kissinger on the Couch (by Phyllis Schlafley and Chester Ward)
15) Background to Betrayal: The Tragedy of Vietnam (by Hilaire du Berrier)
16) The Ravens (by Christopher Robbins)
17) Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution (by Antony Sutton)
18) Western Technology and Soviet Economic Development (by Antony Sutton)
19) National Suicide: Military Aid to the Soviet Union (by Antony Sutton)
20) The Best Enemy Money Can Buy (by Antony Sutton)
21) The Fearful Master (by G. Edward Griffin)
22) Richard Nixon: The Man Behind the Mask (by Gary Allan)
23) None Dare Call it Conspiracy (by Gary Allan)
24) None Dare Call it Treason...25 Years Later (by John Stormer)
25) Betrayal (by Bill Gertz)
26) Year of the Rat (by Edward Timperlake and William C. Triplett)
27) Inside the State Department (by Bryton Barron, who worked in the State Department)
28) The Untouchable State Department (by Bryton Barron)
29) The Assassination of Joe McCarthy (by Medford Evans)
30) Who Promoted Peress? (by Lionel Likos)
31) The Lattimore Story (by John Flynn)
32) McCarthy and his Enemies (by William Buckley and Brent Bozell)
33) The Secret War for the A-bomb (by Medford Evans, who was part of the Manhattan Project)
34) Operation Keelhaul (by Julius Epstein)
35) The East Came West (by Peter J. Huxley-Blythe)
36) The Ordeal of Otto Otepka (by William J. Gill)
37) The Bleeding of America (by Herman H. Dinsmore)
38) How We Lost the Vietnam War (by Nguyen Cao Ky, former premier of South Vietnam)
39) Ally Betrayed (by David Martin)
40) Survival is Not Enough: Soviet Realities and America's Future (by Richard Pipes)
41) The Web of Subversion (by James Burnham)
42) Red Scare or Red Menace?: American Communism and Anticommunism in the Cold War Era (by John Earl Haynes)
43) Trilaterals Over Washington (by Antony Sutton)
44) Trilaterals Over America (by Antony Sutton)
45) Nixon and the CFR (by Phoebe Courtney)
46) The Invisible Government (by Dan Smoot, who used to be in the FBI)
47) The Welfare States (by Colonel Victor J. Fox)
48) America's Unelected Rulers: The Council on Foreign Relations (by Kent and Phoebe Courtney)
49) The Shadows of Power (by James Perloff)
50) The Tax-Exempt Foundations (by William H McIlhany)
51) The Shah's Story (by Mohammed Reza Pahlavi)

i'm curious, when did a reading list become a replacement for a backed up line of arguement??

Fundamentally, it's because Communism (and the various incarnations of state enforced societal equality) are diametrically opposed to evolution.
1. Communism is a classless, propertyless, stateless society. It is not state-enforced, since it involves the abolition of the state.

2. There is no such thing as state enforced social equality. As long as there is a state, there will always be some inequality. The point of socialism and other egalitarian systems that admit the existence of a state is not to achieve full equality, but to get as close as possible to full equality.

3. THE SOVIET UNION DID NOT MAKE EVERYONE EQUAL AND IT NEVER CLAIMED TO HAVE DONE SO. It had less inequality than the West, but it was by no means a completely egalitarian society. Thus, people who say that the Soviet Union collapsed "because everyone received the same wage" don't really know what they're talking about.

If you amass power and material wealth, you increase the chances of your children (and your childrens' children) passing your DNA down through the generations.
Except that the ability to amass power and wealth in modern society has nothing to do with your DNA. Our DNA hasn't changed from the days we were hunter-gatherers. Your DNA might be good or bad if you were to hunt for food on the plains of Africa, but it's mostly irrelevant in the modern world.

Why is it that only the orange smarties taste of something other than chocolate?

Because shit happens.

I don't find much of remarkable interest in Russian politics after 1921, and am inclined to say that individuals and groups pursuing power within a single bloc are bound to come into conflict and eventually to seek separation for personal gain. I don't see anything unusual in the structures of the USSR's core hierachy that would make it much different from other nations, it's just that it was more natural for something relatively distinct like Estonia or Latvia to be snatched by an individual agenda than for the same to happen in Brittany or Virginia, for example.

Ask the Shah. Or Chiang Kai-shek. Or Nguyen Van Thieu. Or Somoza. Or Trujillo. Or one of the many, many other anticommunists we betrayed.
You mean all the near-fascist brutal anticommunist dictators the USA betrayed? For that matter, you "betrayed" Hitler too (he expected the western allies to help him in his fight to destroy the Soviet Union and exterminate or enslave its peoples), but since when is that a bad thing?

Given the fact that the USA claimed to defend human rights, it's shameful that you allied with so many fascist dictators in the first place. "Betraying" them was the right thing to do, even if it came a little late in most cases.

You mean all the near-fascist brutal anticommunist dictators the USA betrayed? For that matter, you "betrayed" Hitler too (he expected the western allies to help him in his fight to destroy the Soviet Union and exterminate or enslave its peoples), but since when is that a bad thing?

Some of them were near fascist, yes (*cough*apartheid South Africa*cough*), some were worse than fascists (Suharto, Rios Montt), but most anticommunists were not. And as for Hitler, U.S. corporations helped him out immensely. Read Wall Street and the Rise of Hitler by Antony Sutton.

"Betraying" them was the right thing to do, even if it came a little late in most cases.

In a few cases (Rios Montt, Trujillo) yes, but in most cases, hell no. Look at who replaced the Shah, Ian Smith, Somoza, Chiang, etc.

David Hasselhoff (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/3465301.stm)

No, Chewbacca was the beginning of the end of the Soviet Union.

The Soviets (since WW2) put tremendous focus on heavy industry. Boats, tanks, planes... they could produce anything from metal.

However, they didn't transfer this zeal to other fields. Their science was always geared to military aspects, and their production of simple goods was crude at best. (Fact: they had an entire department in Moscow whose job it was to determine why the USSR couldn't make enough washing powder!)

Take that they had to compete against the west in space, in arms, and in industry, the lack of capital, the lack of infrastructure in the USSR, and the lack of markets simply caused it to be in an untenable situation in the late 80s.

The Soviet Union was in the process of decay long before the west noticed - mainly because the Soviets themselves wanted to keep the image of a strong Soviet Union alive. What happened in the late 1980's under Gorbachov was essentially inevitable. :)

Afghanistan helped as well. Lots of money was put into keeping the Soviet army running in Afghanistan. At one point, they just had to pull out not only because of the freedom fighters, but also because the Soviet economy couldn't sustain the occupation effort.

My opinion is that the USSR collapsed for a multitude of reasons. You can't just pin it on one occurrance, and go from there. The USSR died from a thousand pinpricks, and Afghanistan is one of them.

i've been doing some research into the matter for my degree recently and it turns out, as far as i can see, that the reason for the collapse of the USSR was nothing like what i was told to think it was, or what the popularised reasons may be. i'm not gonna say what i've found just yet cos i'd like to see what other people (from different parts of the world) think or are told what the reason is :)

so.... why did the USSR collapse?

Because human beings are not inherently altruistic. Any utopian theory that relies on an entire society going against their naturally acquisitive and self-motivated tendencies has to either fall apart as soon as it comes into collision with reality, or has to be enforced by the Government in such away that personal freedom and self-determination become a thing of the past. Fascism cannot endure, no matter what noble language and ideas it tries to disguise itself with.

Of course the fact that even the potential of the Strategic Defence Initiative (Star Wars) becoming a reality would have rendered the billions the USSR spent on ICBMs obsolete, meant the arms race was one that the Soviets could no longer afford to compete in. People say SDI couldn't have been done, but people said Kennedy was overly optimistic about having men on the moon before the end of the 60s too.

So basically, Ronald Reagan plagiarising George Lucas ended the cold war, SEE HOLLYWOOD REALLY DOES SAVE THE WORLD!!!!!!!!11111

Afghanistan helped as well. Lots of money was put into keeping the Soviet army running in Afghanistan. At one point, they just had to pull out not only because of the freedom fighters, but also because the Soviet economy couldn't sustain the occupation effort.

My opinion is that the USSR collapsed for a multitude of reasons. You can't just pin it on one occurrance, and go from there. The USSR died from a thousand pinpricks, and Afghanistan is one of them.

Well put.

i've been doing some research into the matter for my degree recently and it turns out, as far as i can see, that the reason for the collapse of the USSR was nothing like what i was told to think it was, or what the popularised reasons may be. i'm not gonna say what i've found just yet cos i'd like to see what other people (from different parts of the world) think or are told what the reason is :)

so.... why did the USSR collapse?

You should talk to my friend. :)

As for my own opinion, I don't have one. We never learned about Russia in school. So what ever my friend says is my opinion, too.

Gorbahev, being nice that’s it, he let democracy in and that’s what killed U.S.S.R Regan did jack shit,

Gorbahev, being nice that’s it, he let democracy in and that’s what killed U.S.S.R Regan did jack shit,

Absolutely. Reagan's aggressive posturing seemed impressive, but in reality, the USSR was in quite a state by 1981. And with Andropov and Gorbachev, that was it really. The US had an impact, but as earlier suggested, that may have been far from detrimental, and certainly to champion Reagan as conquering the evil empire is nonsense. It is a nonsense that prevails (witness Bush's surprisingly intelligent attempts to win favourable comparisons during the funeral process) unfortunately, while Reagan's real legacy remains forgotten by many.

As for a better answer, the fall of the USSR stems from 1917 and earlier, and there is not one real response - rather a complex web of economic study and political thought. Not much help, except that you're unlikely to receive a wunderpost that explains it all 'just like that'.

i've been doing some research into the matter for my degree recently and it turns out, as far as i can see, that the reason for the collapse of the USSR was nothing like what i was told to think it was, or what the popularised reasons may be. i'm not gonna say what i've found just yet cos i'd like to see what other people (from different parts of the world) think or are told what the reason is :)

so.... why did the USSR collapse?
Primarily two reasons:

1. It could not keep up economically, especially when the US was building the "Star Wars" missle defense shield.

2. It contained within itself the seeds of its own destruction.

It was Chewbacca. And, when Lucas made the third Star Wars film, and brought in those little teddy bear things, that was the beginning of the end for the Soviet Union.

So.... why did the USSR collapse?

Stalin.

Because human beings are not inherently altruistic.


So why did the USSR last so long then, and why does Cuba continue to function in the face of all opposition from the world's only remaining super-power?

So why did the USSR last so long then, and why does Cuba continue to function in the face of all opposition from the world's only remaining super-power?

Fear.

Latvia and Lithuania got their independency back in 1990, Estonia a year later.


They all got their independence back at the same time in 1991.
I'm lithuanian and it is very untrue. Lithuania declared independece on 1990 03 11 and the whole mess lasted for a less than a year until Russians made their last unsuccessful attempt to force their will on us in 1991 01 13. So officially we became independent in 1990 and 03 11 is our national holiday.

As for the reasons, I believe there were a lot of them, but the most imporant one is the abscence of civil rights. No freedom of thought, propaganda everywhere, no national symbols allowed (no flags, no anthems, no history), no freedom of religion. A country can't live long with all of the people unhappy about this amount of rules and regulations strangling them.

Fear.

Who is afraid of whom?

Who is afraid of whom?
The general population was afraid of the organs of state security, as well as the military.

You don't remember Hungary? Or Czechoslovakia?

Fear kept people in line. The moment everyone realized the military and KGB weren't going to stop them, the Soviet Union collapsed.

The general population was afraid of the organs of state security, as well as the military.

You don't remember Hungary? Or Czechoslovakia?

Fear kept people in line. The moment everyone realized the military and KGB weren't going to stop them, the Soviet Union collapsed.

And what of Cuba?

And what of Cuba?

There are plenty of secret police there, as well as the military.

Want to go to jail? Just open your mouth and criticize the government in public.

Cuba is, economically, a country in ruin.

I'm sure it had a lot to do with the CIA giving the Soviets bad software for their oil pipeline. Their last hope for maintaining the already weak economy (oil) was literally blown to hell.

It was pretty much downhill from there.

There are plenty of secret police there, as well as the military.

Want to go to jail? Just open your mouth and criticize the government in public.

Cuba is, economically, a country in ruin.

There is however still a large amount of support for the communist regime there, which does not seem to be all entirely forced upon the populace by threat.

If anything the fact that Cuba continues to operate as a communist state despite its terrible economy is a testament to this support: most commentators expected it to shrivel up and die following the collapse of the Eastern Bloc, but it survived through the lean years, even when the people were reduced to eating cats and dogs when they were lucky.a case can be made that the economic state of Cuba might very well not be a result of its communist management, but instead due to the sanctions which the US imposed as a result of the revolution there - it certainly can't be used as a cut-and-dried example of why communism can't work.

There is however still a large amount of support for the communist regime there, which does not seem to be all entirely forced upon the populace by threat.

If anything the fact that Cuba continues to operate as a communist state despite its terrible economy is a testament to this support: most commentators expected it to shrivel up and die following the collapse of the Eastern Bloc, but it survived through the lean years, even when the people were reduced to eating cats and dogs when they were lucky.a case can be made that the economic state of Cuba might very well not be a result of its communist management, but instead due to the sanctions which the US imposed as a result of the revolution there - it certainly can't be used as a cut-and-dried example of why communism can't work.

Never underestimate the power of indoctrination from youth.

I would bet that it collapses when Castro dies. In fact, I'll put money on it.

Never underestimate the power of indoctrination from youth.

This argument might work as an answer if the revolution hadn't happened within living memory: for example it would have been more applicable to the USSR pre-fall.

I would bet that it collapses when Castro dies. In fact, I'll put money on it.

I believe you may well be right.

Also, although the embargo had an initial effect, I don't think it has any real effect right now.

Other than keeping their technology level somewhere in the 1960s, which may be their own choice.

I'm not convinced that a system is "working" if it's based on the idea that "everyone will be equally miserable".

BTW, had a friend go there about five years ago. He said that prostitution is rampant, and the government turns a blind eye to it - on the idea that it helps tourism - they want men to come back again.

Well, it's a very very complex thing, the fall of the USSR, but a little bit of stuff can be seen.

-David Hasselhoff (German's love 'im!)
-Growing discontent stemming from:
-Failures of the planned economy (shortages of things like toilet paper and oranges)
-ethnic discontent (everyone getting tired of Russian domination)
-General unrest
-Exterior Forces:
-Increasing encounters with westerners and western lifestyles and comfort.
-US and NATO Military Pressure on Soviet Union, including US military buildup, and attempts by the US to match that by the Soviet military, and the Soviet economy's inability to keep up.
-Unrest in Soviet satellite states, Solidarity in Poland, Unification movement in Germany, etc, etc.
-Inability to fit into the growing global economy.
-Interior government forces:
-Incredible amounts of corruption, a beureaucratic syncophant culture and an inability to report bad news. The top politicians were often getting bad data.
-Hard-liners unwillingness to change causing inefficiency, eventually resulting in coup.
-Mortimer Zuckerman (Not really involved, but he's got a damn cool name)
-Jacques Chirac (same with MZ, not involved, but he's got a damn cool name)

This is an incomplete list of the factors that toppled the Soviet Union. There are more factors, and all these factors have different weights.

And what of Cuba?
A personality cult. Castro is what maintains Cuba. People love him. He's got some sort of glowing nickname and everything. Without Castro, Cuba would have fallen ages ago. But Castro was able to maintain the revolutionary myth around himself, and as such, the Cuban people love him.

It was a combination of jeans and rock. Combined with a downturn in vodka quality.

It was a combination of jeans and rock. Combined with a downturn in vodka quality.
Little did they know, a Brita Filter can be used to make cheap Vodka taste pretty good!

Actually, the bad vodka caused everyone to make bootleg... and then sell it on the black market, training them in capitalism. So I'm serious. ;)

-Failures of the planned economy (shortages of things like toilet paper and oranges)

and a failure of centralized economy in a country as big as USSR with different needs in every region.
you cannot plan that this year we'll be producing 2400% of our usual tank production rate and 3200% and forgetting toliet paper and so.

from my point of view and i live too close to russia:

gorbatschev > fall of berlin wall / solidarity in poland / other countries free > general discontent on one side and lack of army funding leads to easing of police state pressure > ussr falls apart

and many others.

and a question why it is coming full circle now and russia is led by putin who is very similar to stalin in terms of being a dictator rather than politician can be answered in a stereotypical way:

because it always was like that. from the Tzars like ivan the terrible thru stalin to putin - being ruled is a meme most likely to be accepted by an average russian person.

Also, although the embargo had an initial effect, I don't think it has any real effect right now.

Other than keeping their technology level somewhere in the 1960s, which may be their own choice.

I'm not convinced that a system is "working" if it's based on the idea that "everyone will be equally miserable".

BTW, had a friend go there about five years ago. He said that prostitution is rampant, and the government turns a blind eye to it - on the idea that it helps tourism - they want men to come back again.

But can you give one examples of failed alturustic societys instead of dictatorship. Because I think most people agree that a true alturistic society is not a dictatorship like the Soviet China and Cuba. Self I don't know if it will ever be a true alturistic society but we have come a bit on the way.

Like for example until around 200 years ago democracy was a pipedream, that almost never existed in history and never had existed in more developed society, even if you hade society like the greec there you hade election but still only a few people was allowed to vote. And the people against democracy could laugh at the first democracy the USA there only whitemales was allowed to vote and there a large part of the population was treated almost as animals. That was also a country that had a bloody civilwar. But if you go today you can see that democracy works pretty well. Even if it have problems in the USA, Russia, Italy and many other countries.

And I personally think democracy is a start for more alturistic society, that will evolve with a bigger public sectors. Like for example in many european countries like my country we have capatilistic competion, but we are still willing to have a big public sectore that take care of people. And things like free education, free healthcare, help to the poor and service for the elders throug taxes that not along ago also was pipedreams is todays reality. Even of course like the basic democracy there are still problems. So I hope and think more alturistic pipedreams will be reality.

The USSR failed, I believe, because they did not allow people to act economically in their own self interest enough. While I do not believe that pure capitalism is at all prudent (people get cought up in their desire to make money and sacrifice the things that would truly bring them happiness such as companionship) communism is also impractical. People naturally have a desire to do at least some things purely for themselves. If you take that away you takes away a big part of peoples' motivation to contribute to society through labor. That said, I also feel that a very socialistic (much closer to communism than capitalism) economic policy is the most preferable.

The USSR collapsed because of the way the central planning system was managed. There was too much bureaucarcy and too little accountability. This led to tech stagnation, which resulted in industrial and commercial decline because the Soviets could not compete in the new technology markets. This combined with the shoddiness that results from equal pay regardless of quality and productivity further cost drove GDP growth down, and tax revenue fell as a result. This was further exacerbated by the 1980's weapons buildup that forced the USSR to divert an unsustainable amount (20%+) to the military, crimping infrastructure and other levels of governtment. Afghanistan set the collapse chain in to motion, since it was a costly disaster on all levels. The breakup of the Eastern Bloc eliminated the economic cooperation that had previously supported the USSR, and so the entire system collapsed in 1991

Well of course the Cuban people love him. Didn't the American people love Mickey Mantel.

Chances are, if you don't love him, his government will kill you or torture you in prison.

Remember Winston:

"But it was all right, everything was all right, the struggle was finished.
He had won the victory over himself. He loved Big Brother. ... "

Because no one wanted to live in the warped world that the Bolsheviks created seventy years earlier. The old guard communists that knew Stalin were mostly dead by the time Gorbi came to power. There was no one left to hold back the change that was so despised by the communists, yet so needed in Russia.
And no, US trade and aid had little to do with supporting the USSR. Their automobiles, while they came from Fiat, were the same models that Fiat made in the 1950s. And of course, 50% of all food rotted in the field. The Soviets got some Western tractors, but rarely used them wisely. They were experts at mismanaging resources.

Chances are, if you don't love him, his government will kill you or torture you in prison.

Remember Winston:

"But it was all right, everything was all right, the struggle was finished.
He had won the victory over himself. He loved Big Brother. ... "

Cuba hasn't done political executions since Castro overthrew the prior dictatorship. In Cuba, Castro goes out in the street wearing no body armor, and is surrounded by throngs of people. He is charismatic, true, but he has no personality cult. The things Castro did for Cubans they are eternally grateful for. The party in Cuba is strong, with massive support. The people remain idealistic and optimistic. The system there will be around for a long time.

The things Castro did for Cubans they are eternally grateful for.

Yes, I'm sure they are eternally grateful to live like this:

http://www.therealcuba.com/


However, I will be the first to admit that pretty much anything would have been better than Batista, and that the blockade has had a negative effect on Cuba on all levels.

More information on Cuba from Human Rights Watch:

http://hrw.org/english/docs/2005/03/10/cuba10306.htm