Dissolution of the SU and what can we learn from it.

[delbruky]

In my opinion the purpose of this thread would be defeated if all the Soviet union related talk doesn't mention the root cause of the difference between "Them" and the westerns cultures.

Not many may agree but The Slavs, The Germanics and Ethnic Indians (meaning us) are very closely related, WE in terms of genealogy are referred to as the "First Cousins". It will be unfair to describe root cause of this divide in an essay on this forum when in reality unending literature has been written on it.
I would only insinuate all to have a crash course on Wikipedia, here's the link.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavs

Soviet Union or Communism or Stalinist socialism are nothing but an attempt to manage the resources of a power center not just a nation state. There were Kejri and jignesh mewani types then and there as well who revolted against the empire and not only illegitimately but also brutally eliminated the first family. The First Family called the "CZARS" or "TSARS", the eliminators were the "Bolshviks". Despite replacing the CZARS their modus operandi so to speak was pretty much the same brute force, fear and corruption. The communists ruled out of envy rather than rule out of pride and ingenuity, their so called pride was more or less ego with a false sense of grandeur, due to this they always spent more than their means and basically continued on the same path as the CZARS. This is what led to their down fall.

 

[Willy3]

Dissolution of SU is set from the very first day SU formed....SU shows how communist want to rule the world , before communist takeover ,it was Russian empire ,a unified country. But Soviet divided it in severel republic ,like they want with india and spain ,based on even relatively week identity like Ukrainian ,all of them controlled from central commity based on Moscow.

If national identity is strong ,then nation can survive hard times too as a family ,but Commies fucked them in very basic phase of nation building , they want to use tribal rule in country.

Communism kill the idea of "one slave" , and born russian-ukrainian-Belorussian ,our indianess is very strong ,Commies and deep state try to use same formula too ,but we are still keep those forces at bay proves the success of our founding fathers ...

 

[binayak95]

I want to take the topic a bit further back in time. Look at the region that the USSR occupied. That vast territory stretching from Siberia to the plains of Ukraine.
Look at the same region through the lens of time.

There has always been a Russian superpower, in various forms, throughout history. Whether the Kievan Rus of early Medieval Europe, or the Czars of Napoleonic Wars, or the modern Autocratic Russian State. The Soviet Union was an abnormality.

Russia has always enjoyed access to vast natural resources, its people famed for their hardiblood and ability to lead successful lives in some of the worst possible habitats. Is it any wonder, that Russia has always been a continental power that inner rim states have at times feared, and outer rim powers sometimes cooperated with?

The Soviet Union was a forceful cobbling up of regions and cultures that had nothing in common with each other. What do central Asian states have in common with Russia, or the Eastern Europe border states of Belarus or Latvia and Lithuania for that matter? No common history (except perhaps that they all were once under the Mongols). In addition to all the fine reasons other writers have quite correctly pointed out, I believe that this cultural incompatibility of the various Socialist States that made the USSR (while keeping Russia first amongst equals) was what doomed it from the very beginning.

The same goes for China, there has never been a China as large as it is today, China has always been split into multiple monarchies and kingdoms. With the most powerful of them controlling the river valleys.

Same for India. The maps that we see today, are by no means final. They may yet change.

 

[aditya10r]

Same for India. The maps that we see today, are by no means final. They may yet change.

Cultural comparability is a thing in china and erstwhile USSR but as far as we are concerned,from north to south,Hinduism keeps us united.It acts as a glue.

Unless there is not a massive demographic change in India,I don't think k the borders will shift for us.

 

[Suryavanshi]

Cultural comparability is a thing in china and erstwhile USSR but as far as we are concerned,from north to south,Hinduism keeps us united.It acts as a glue.

Unless there is not a massive demographic change in India,I don't think k the borders will shift for us.

Currently the most vulnerable regions of India are
-Kashmir
-North East(Nagaland, Manipur)
-Kerela
-West Bengal if the Bangladesi aren't kicked out

 

[binayak95]

You misunderstood me. My bad. I meant ki this map of India will change. All Indian empires have included Sind, baloch, and the entirety of Punjab. That is both the Indus valley and the Ganga-Yamuna valley. It's almost inevitable.
Look at it this way. All throughout history, the present day North West Frontier Province areas have always been volatile and impossible to govern.

Right from the time of Chandragupta Maurya through the Delhi sultanates to Akbar, the British Raj and then later the Soviet entanglement and now the US predicament. That area is ungovernable.

Cultural comparability is a thing in china and erstwhile USSR but as far as we are concerned,from north to south,Hinduism keeps us united.It acts as a glue.

Unless there is not a massive demographic change in India,I don't think k the borders will shift for us.

 

[aditya10r]

You misunderstood me. My bad. I meant ki this map of India will change. All Indian empires have included Sind, baloch, and the entirety of Punjab. That is both the Indus valley and the Ganga-Yamuna valley. It's almost inevitable.

Does that means a war with phattu pakistanis?????

I was dying for this day.

 

[binayak95]

Either Pakistan balkanisies and we step in to secure Makran coast or bloody revolution occurs forcing our hand.either way works bro.

Does that means a war with phattu pakistanis?????

I was dying for this day.

 

[aditya10r]

Either Pakistan balkanisies and we step in to secure Makran coast or bloody revolution occurs forcing our hand.either way works bro.

I guess I should try to make way in the armed forces.

__________________________________________

 

[Tactical Frog]

The way I see it, the Soviet Union and its satellites just died out of boredom. People were so bored with the inefficiency of the whole system that support for its political form had almost totally vanished . That is why the final collapse was almost bloodless.

You have to consider that in the Soviet Union of the late 80s you had to wait for years to get your own apartment , one you were not forced to share with another family . You had to wait on a queue list for a car. You had little choice for your shoes, clothes, furniture. You could only dream of simple things like a Japanese quartz watch with a liquid crystal display.
An Atari console would have been worshipped like a thing of outer space !

 

[Johny_Baba]

Glad we finally have a dedicated thread on this topic.

Although I would also request to all members to have a parallel discussion of Dissolution of German Democratic Republic (i.e. East Germany) and reunification of her with her democratic sister Federal Republic of Germany (i.e. West Germany) and what we can learn from it.

 

[Bahamut]

No utopia will last for ever , conflict is needed to get rid of imperfection in society

 

[Peter]

@Project Dharma @aditya10r @dhananjay1 @thethinker @Haldiram @Dovah @pmaitra @Peter @nongaddarliberal @Bharat Ek Khoj @Johny_Baba @Bhumihar @delbruky @spikey360 @ezsasa @Adioz @Tactical Frog @Keshav Murali and others I have missed...

Guys if you have anything to say regards to this, any info or thoughts, please do share.

Thanks for the mention.

I would like to post my views in several posts.

First thing is that the idea of a Communist State or a nation is itself flawed. Communism and Socialism are theories that seem perfect on paper. Every man is deemed equal and has access to the inalienable rights of a human being. However the implementation of such a grandiose and perfect doctrine seems to be impossible. The people who implement the Communist/Socialist doctrine after a Communist Revolution tend to behave more aristocratic and vain than the very monarchs they had overthrown.

In case of the Russian Revolution the main protagonist was Lenin, a man who belonged to the much persecuted and vilified Russian Jewish community(Lenins mother had Jewish blood,a pre requisite to be called a Jew). There were many pogroms against Jews instituted by the Russian Tsars and Czars. He thus held hatred against the aristocracy and the Orthodox Christian community of Russia. This was further compounded by the fact that he came from a serf family. Serfs were treated worse than animals by the Russian aristocracy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Jewish_pogroms_in_the_Russian_Empire


He became a supporter of Communism as Communism puts both majority party in power(Orthodox Christians including the aristrocracy) and the political minority(Jews,Islamic Russians) on the same pedestal.

Yet after the successful Russian Revolution, Lenin put aside his stances of equality and brutally massacred the Russian aristocracy and the Orthodox Christian clergy of Russia. The royal family members were allegedly brutally raped and murdered and all religious institutions were suppressed.

Lenin`s Communist state was created by shedding the blood of the majority. Thus SU was not created equally from the very beginning. The political minority were cared for more than the political majority. If the SU had instead opted for a more pragmatic and non violent approach things may have been different.

Lenin also sold out SU/Russia to the Germans and Turks. His Bolshevik Revolution was itself funded by Germany.

Also SU remains the only country among the allies to have been defeated in WW 1. They even gave up territory to the Turks. All because of Lenin baba.


https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/19/opinion/was-lenin-a-german-agent.html

http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/lenin-returns-to-russia-from-exile

The SU preached equality at the beginning but people like Stalin etc became the new monarchs unleashing Purges and massacres. The old monarchs had transformed themselves as the new Communist party General Secretaries.


P.S. Read Animal Farm by Leo Tolstoy.

Anyway here is a take by Sargon.


I would talk about Stalin in a different post.

 

[Illusive]

Cultural comparability is a thing in china and erstwhile USSR but as far as we are concerned,from north to south,Hinduism keeps us united.It acts as a glue.

Unless there is not a massive demographic change in India,I don't think k the borders will shift for us.

But the real India already broke up, pakistan and bangladesh is the result.

 

[aditya10r]

But the real India already broke up, pakistan and bangladesh is the result.

Religion.

Islam is not compatible with anything.

_________________________________________

 

[Peter]

@Amrk has already given a nice explanation of Stalin`s role in SU>

Stalin`s reign in SU was probably the most influential one and it would have later indirect effects on the breakup of SU.

Stalin was a follower of the great Russian monarch Ivan the Terrible and Peter the Great. Infact he was a monarchist sort of guy. Probably it made little difference to him if he was leading a Communist or Fascist SU. He was an Ultra Nationalist.


Stalin adopted the Leninist view on the need for a revolutionary vanguard who could lead the proletariat rather than being led by them.[Leading this vanguard, he believed that the Soviet peoples needed a strong, central figure—akin to a Tsar—whom they could rally around. In his words, "the people need a Tsar, whom they can worship and for whom they can live and work".He read about, and admired, two Tsars in particular: Ivan the Terrible and Peter the Great.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Stalin

Stalin viewed nations as contingent entities which were formed by capitalism and could merge into others.[678] Ultimately he believed that all nations would merge into a single, global human community,[678] and regarded all nations as inherently equal.[679] Stalin argued that the Jews possessed a "national character" but were not a "nation" and were thus unassimilable. He argued that Jewish nationalism, particularly Zionism, was hostile to socialism.[680] In his work, he stated that "the right of secession" should be offered to the ethnic-minorities of the Russian Empire, but that they should not be encouraged to take that option.[681] He was of the view that if they became fully autonomous, then they would end up being controlled by the most reactionary elements of their community; as an example he cited the largely illiterate Tatars, whom he claimed would end up dominated by their mullahs.[681] Khlevniuk therefore argued that Stalin reconciled Marxism with imperialism.[682] According to Service, Stalin's Marxism was imbued with a great deal of Russian nationalism

Also Stalin was an anti Semite and a great proponent of Russian nationalism.


Stalin forcibly deported thousands of non Russian ethnic minorities in SU like the Chechens etc. He caused the Holodomor in Ukrainian SSR.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor

It is like a PM in India forcibly deporting all Kashmiri Muslims into other parts of India as minorities and repopulating their lands with non native population.

However Stalin`s strategy worked and the SU was the strongest power in the world under his reign. SU gained more territory under him than under any other GS of SU. Also SU managed to dominate the world.

However the scars of his brutal regime would act as the catalyst for the breakup of SU.

 

[Peter]

Finally, the SU breakup is complete without mentioning Gorbachev.

The SU was doomed from the beginning as it never gave true power to the masses. Instead the proletariat was guided by the Communist vanguard who would overlook the Revolution. This vanguard was worse than the monarchs.

It is similar to the Leftist Rule in Bengal where Jyoti Basu and his comrades lived a grandiose bhodrolok life while the auto and rickshawlalahs had to put a Herculean fight to make ends meet.

Anyway in SU problems like lack of innovation due to poor scientific funding,lack of high end manufactured goods and over-reliance on agri products and natural resources were too much for the SU state machinery to handle.

Gorbachev only hastened the demise of SU.

His liberal policies meant that he ethnicities suppressed under the Stalinist regime could now voice their dissent and form autonomous groups. From autonomy they demanded freedom. Gorby being a softy could not use the brutal hard handed tactics of Stalin. So everything came apart at the end.

The allure of capitalism and the failure of implementation of true communist principles all lead to the breakup of SU.

 

[aarav]

It is more because of an ideology which was fighting against fundamentals of economics ,it was like India under licence Raj when to get a telephone you had to wait eternity , India most fragile decades were 50s and and 60s ,I think after liberalisation no one would dream in main land India (excluding J&K and north east ) for separatism ,Winston Churchill the vile hater of our culture after the Indian independence act was passed by labor government said that India is as much a country as Equator is ,even now some western neocolonists claim India is a artificial union,Capitalism is a saviour of our Republic even our religion support punjivaad as laksmi ,after the true merger of our state economy through GST we can unleash more efficiency in our output and such pessimism through fear mongering of balkanisation of India is no best ,Comparing Soviet union to Republic Of India is a fallacy as Soviet union was a ideological state ,India is not ,even kerela was first democratically elected communist govt, it is universal adult franchise which make our citizens feel empowered but after becoming a $2.5 trillion dollar economy fear mongering of Balkanisation of India should be stopped

 

[nongaddarliberal]

One of the primary reasons they fell was to ignore one of the most innate practices in mankind: Trade. You cannot run a society for long if you don't allow your people to use their talents to gain profit. This is one of the most fundamental weaknesses of communism. The chinese were very smart when they moved away from an even more repressive communist systen into a neoliberal economic system, although with lots of state corporations and artificial manipulation of the markets, in 1979.

But when you look at Glasnost and Perestroika, it was nowhere to the scale of what China did. In fact it made matters worse, because the state was equally intrusive, but there was more freedom of expression. This just resulted in a lot more peoppe getting to know the real situation of the country. Every news show or radio broadcast in the 1980s was filled woth constant complaints from citizens. About disappeared relatives, about lack of food, lack of incentives to work, corruption etc. This completely demoralized the previously enthusiastic communist population of Russia.

This also happened in the time when the west had an undisputable lead in standard of living. Previously, in the 50s, 60s and 70s, there were some advantages of being a soviet over being a frenchman or an italian. And they had a lot to look down at America too, primarily regarding the Jim Crow laws of segregation against Blacks and Mexicans(sometimes). Contrast this with the principle of racial equality that were there since the 1920s in the soviet union. Central Asian, Mongoloids, Slavs, and Caucasians( actually from the caucuses), all got along with each other and had no problems eating together or even intermarrying.

Now lets take the Air India example. Compare it to any private airline in India and it is far less efficient for the same amount of money. Why? Because air india knows that the govt will bail it out whenever it fucks up. IndiGo has no such luxury. The entire soviet econony was running along the lines of Air India.

 

[nongaddarliberal]

This is an excellent illustration of the difference between soviet and western mentalities. There is so much to comment on the video. But one thing I would like to point out was regarding the rockets vs washing machine analogy. Rockets are a symbol of an advanced government. Washing machines are a symbol of a diverse and rich provate sector. But we now know that even for very advsnced technology, the private sector is a must, and will always be more efficient than government run organizations like OFB or DRDO.