- 26 Feb 2011 01:42
#13640725
It would be a theory, except it doesn't account for why it collapse in the late 1980s, rather than the early 1980s, or 1970s, or 1960s or 1950s.
No. Problems didn't just "develop" a bit under Gorbachev. Gorbachev ushered in a radical and transformational agenda which brought all sorts of new problems.
Wrong. Duma is the legislature.
Actually, most of your material seems from Gaidar or similar. The Chernyaev quote on grain, for instance, which is the closest you come to implying a problem with grain, has the first hit on Google as this thread and the second as Gaidar's article on Grain and Oil. It's not really particularly balanced.
It's rather hard for me as I'm not going through this information for the first time. But we'd do best to focus on whether the problems that led to the collapse of the Soviet Union were primarily a product of pre- or post-Gorbachev moves.
Your position seems to be that despite the Soviet Union having been around for 70 years with all the systemic problems that meant it was destined to have a "crap economy", that somehow magically the economy became unsustainable in the late 1980s and led to collapse. My position is that something BIG happened in the mid-1980s in the form of Gorbachev's reform agenda, that they went above and beyond what was necessary and caused a collapse.
The Soviet union collapsed because people were sick and tired of communism since it couldnt provide them with good services or plentiful goods.
It would be a theory, except it doesn't account for why it collapse in the late 1980s, rather than the early 1980s, or 1970s, or 1960s or 1950s.
Could have been, but he just inherited the problems that were there to begin with and that came to a head while under his watch.
No. Problems didn't just "develop" a bit under Gorbachev. Gorbachev ushered in a radical and transformational agenda which brought all sorts of new problems.
Russian legislature, what about it?
Wrong. Duma is the legislature.
Had you looked at that shopping list, you would see I do not look at one point/source or person.
Actually, most of your material seems from Gaidar or similar. The Chernyaev quote on grain, for instance, which is the closest you come to implying a problem with grain, has the first hit on Google as this thread and the second as Gaidar's article on Grain and Oil. It's not really particularly balanced.
Maxim Litvinov, it would be nice if you showed where you get said information
It's rather hard for me as I'm not going through this information for the first time. But we'd do best to focus on whether the problems that led to the collapse of the Soviet Union were primarily a product of pre- or post-Gorbachev moves.
Your position seems to be that despite the Soviet Union having been around for 70 years with all the systemic problems that meant it was destined to have a "crap economy", that somehow magically the economy became unsustainable in the late 1980s and led to collapse. My position is that something BIG happened in the mid-1980s in the form of Gorbachev's reform agenda, that they went above and beyond what was necessary and caused a collapse.