Central Planning Of The Soviet Union

One can easily admit that the Party had failed to properly economically plan the needs of each state. The Soviet Union economy was complex and massive, it became an impossible task for the state planners to manage, as they did not want to grant and create more managerial levels that would proceed to the local level resulting in failed timely attempts to the constant changes the economy was going through. Since the Soviet economy was based on state planning, it failed in encouraging innovation and motivating productivity. Managers would also alter numbers in order to produce the quotas that they were required to meet. The growth of the Soviet economy had been in a constant decline since the 1950’s and this progressed to the 1980’s. This was a clear sign that the Soviet economy was in need of a complete economic overhaul. Gorbachev succeeded power in March, 1985 and became General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist party of the Soviet Union. His main goal was to revive the Soviet economy, and he strongly believed that success was tied to loosening the governments control and creating a system that included less government intervention and more freedom to allow private initiatives. This new market economy would allow for private enterprise, which what Gorbachev believed would create more innovation. For the first time since 1920’s, individuals were able to own and create businesses.

Gorbachev's policy of Glasnost eliminated the strict censorship practiced for hundreds of years. Glasnost stands for openness, and Soviet citizens were now allowed to speak openly about their country's problems. Perestroika, or

This study will examine Gorbachev's understanding of the Glasnost policy and the role of Glasnost in Gorbachev's larger political reform program with the help of the Gorbachev Factor, by Archie Brown, and Gorbachev's Glasnost, by Joseph Gibbs.

The New Economic Policy (NEP) was a measure implemented in order to counter the arguably disastrous effects War Communism. The New Economic is controversial. Some historians argue it allowed the Soviet economy to solidify and begin to recover, and also allowed the Bolsheviks to retain control over Russia. Others, like Orlando Figes, state it was ultimately a failure, arguing that under the NEP the peasants grew away from the Bolshevik regime, inviting a future, and brutal, reassertion of central control.s This essay will discuss the effectiveness of the NEP economically and politically as well as outlining War Communism and why it failed

Joseph Stalin was one of Russia’s most powerful and ruthless leaders. With his economic policies, he attained the favour of the struggling working class people and with the power he obtained from being a leader he eliminated the opposing party members. The concept of a ‘Five-Year-Plan’ was adopted by the Soviet Union as they sought escalated industrialization and controlled the economy where peasantry was directly in political power.

A command economy is one in which the co-ordination of economic activity is controlled and undertaken through administrative means rather than through the market mechanism (Ericson, 2005). Many aspects of the Soviet economy fit this description such as its organisational structure, the methods by which aims and directives were carried out and its lack of a use of pricing within its financial mechanisms, thus it can be argued that the term command economy is an accurate description. However there are another of other aspects to consider such as the use of bargaining to develop a second ‘economy of agreement’ and the

Former Soviet Premier Mikhail Gorbachev presided over the disintegration of a country based on an uncompromising ideological dogma, the unlikely inheritor of Marxist/Leninist communist philosophy. The Soviet Union’s unwieldy economic superstructure left it vulnerable to Ronald Reagan’s aggressive economic/military policy, an approach based on the belief that a military build-up would force the Soviets to spend to keep pace, an effective strategy because it pushed the Soviet economy over the edge into ruin. The subsequent implosion ended communist domination in Eastern Europe and opened the way for democratic elements that radically altered the political landscape in Moscow. When the Soviet Union officially came to an end in 1993, it briefly recalled the end of tsarist rule in 1917, with the potential for the kind of chaos and violence that turned the Russian Revolution into a bloodbath. President Boris Yeltsin used the military to disband parliament but his call for new elections moved the country toward a more open, democratic form of government. Lacking any real background in representative government, Russia ultimately proved incapable of fulfilling the promise of democratic government and descended into a form of anarchy riddled by increasingly strong criminal elements. In recent years, the rise of Boris Putin, a new strongman in Moscow, helped restore a sense of order and allowed the resurgence of communist elements. The government that now holds power, and which

Socialism offered an ‘ideal’ and classless society in which the state controlled everything, yet the people utilized the practice of controlling politics. He formed a highly centralized government, which was furthered to totalitarian goals by his successor, Joseph Stalin. Stalin focused on military and industrial gains which, by his death in 1953, had “crippled the Soviet state” because his successors could not make any reforms without undermining the CPSU—the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (367). A heavy reliance on secret police and a militarized economy was already in place when Mikhail Gorbachev came on the scene. He was elected General Secretary of the CPSU in 1985 when the USSR was in middle of continually diminishing economic productivity; it became stagnant. With his powers as secretary, he saw room for reform to change the USSR drastically. He planned to do this through instituting glastnost, or openness, in society, which he believed would ameliorate levels of corruption. Corruption was a detriment to democratization, which he believed would heal the economy. He brought back the first contested elections in many years. With democratic procedures in place, Gorbachev lost his power to Yeltsin. Notwithstanding the amended constitution, Yeltsin took liberty to control parliament to “cope with the country’s economic problems” (369). Yeltsin’s successor was chosen as Vladimir Putin who has severely radicalized the

During the rule of the Soviet Union from 1922 to 1989, many great and many terrible events occurred that are important and vital to our knowledge of history. The purpose of learning history is so that we as people are well-educated on different governments and ideologies and so that we, in this day and age, can do our very best to not repeat past mistakes. The USSR, while they developed culturally as a country, destroyed millions of lives all across Western Europe with their communist approach to rule and their blinded goal of total power. The history books today give a good insight into how terrible the Soviet Union really was, but these textbooks are written as objectively as possible. The future history textbooks should shed a negative light on all of the wrongdoings of the Soviet Union so that students understand that what happened this century was horrific and should never occur again.

The many long-term internal causes of the collapse of the Soviet Union centralized around weaknesses in their economy. They had an inflexible central planning system, the inability to modernize, and the inefficiency in their agriculture production. Sometime around the 1970's the computer and automation revolution had emerged. This revolution took over the West, but practically missed the Soviet Union, except in the military sector (Baylis & Smith, 2001.) Gorbachev's goal in economic restructuring was to create a separation between the economic and the political. The major changes began with the legalization of private farming and business co-operatives, and the allowing of foreign company ownership over Soviet enterprises (Baylis &Smith, 2001) All of Gorbachev's ideas on economic restructuring backfired on him since the price levels were inconsistent, and a sense of social confusion about the future of their state was created.

To combine this compromise with the ideology of the party, the state kept control of the heavy industries. Lenin saw the NEP as a short-term fix which meant "a step backwards" in the development of communism but one which would restore the economy. Once this had happened, the country could take the "two steps forwards" to achieve a communist state. The success of the NEP was a double-edged sword. On the one hand, the NEP had revived the economy, increased foreign trade and also electrified the country which was seen as a great success. On the other hand the NEP divided the party into a left and right wing.

The Russian state has been characterized by its strong heritage of powerful, autocratic leadership. This domination by small ruling elite has been seen throughout Russia's history and has transferred into its economic history. Throughout the Russian czarist period, to the legacy of seventy years of communism; Russia has been a country marked by strong central state planning, a strict command economy and an overall weak market infrastructure (Goldman, 2003). Self-interest, manipulation and corruption have all been present in the Russian economy, and have greatly helped the few as opposed to the many. To this day, Russia still struggles with creating a competitive and fair market.

After the experiment with the New Economic Policy was tested for almost seven years, it was decided that it would be ended, due to the ever growing need for faster and better development of the Soviet economy, technology and industrialization. The NEP was primarily used to bring the nation out of a deep economic and social trough, which had killed millions of people, because of famines and revolts. While the Marxist-Communist idea was indeed kept throughout the entire endeavor, capitalism was brought back into the economic side of Russia; it was felt that the NEP would be "Building Socialism with Capitalist Hands" , though the idea of using any form of capitalist ideas or practices would explicitly go against the Marxist, communist and socialist policies, that was the main feeling behind many of the leading Soviets at the time.

#1. In the late 1980s, Soviet Union had brought its glasnost (openness) era. Soviet president Mikhail G. introduced the revolutionary idea of Perestroika, which refers to “economic restructuring.” Gradually, Soviet’s culture and business began to grow. The political parties began to spring up, and farmers began to sell their products on the open market. In 1987, the Kremlin passed a new law on the joint ventures, easing restrictions on the importation of foreign capital, technology, and expertise.

Under Mikhail Gorbachev the Soviet Union underwent massive social, political and economic reform that drifted away from communist ideology and this ultimately lead to the collapse of the Soviet Union and failure of communism in Eastern Europe. This essay will focus on how the Perestroika reform and Glasnost policy programs as well as other external and internal pressures contributed to the failure of communism under Gorbachev. The aim of the Perestroika and Glasnost reforms was to restructure and strengthen the Soviet political and economic system and provide more freedom and democracy within the Soviet Union while strengthening Communism. However, these changes had achieved exactly what they aimed to prevent when they were first elaborated and led to the failure of communism and collapse of the Soviet Union. While focusing on the policies this essay will also focus on the major increase in nationalism that occurred in the Soviet Republics as a result of the Glasnost. External pressure from the western world was also a factor and the role that the United States and the Ronald Reagan administration played in the downfall of communism under Gorbachev will be examined. The essay will also discuss how the disintegration of Yugoslavia and the 1991 Coup d’état led to the failure of the policies and failure of communism.