Radical Ambitions, Gradual Results

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.

The Progressive Era was a period of social activism from the 1890s to the 1920s. The main objectives of this era was correcting political corruption, providing protection for consumers and employees/eliminating child labor, giving women equal rights, and eliminating monopolies (i.e. trust-busting). These issue existed due to post civil war time periods including Reconstruction and the Gilded Age, which preceded the Progressive Era. The Progressive Era is accurately termed for the description of the time period from 1901 to 1920 because the majority of its main objectives were addressed. These objectives included trust-busting, child labor, consumer protection, and women’s rights.

The democratization, economic liberalization, and eventual collapse of the Soviet Union is commonly attributed to Mikhail Gorbachev's Perestroika and Glasnost reforms during the period of 1985-1991. This purpose of these reforms is still a trenchant question as the countries of the old Soviet Union, particular Russia, are being pressured to further liberalize their economies.

The Soviet Union, which was once a world superpower in the 19th century saw itself in chaos going into the 20th century. These chaoses were marked by the new ideas brought in by the new leaders who had emerged eventually into power. Almost every aspect of the Soviet Union was crumbling at this period both politically and socially, as well as the economy. There were underlying reasons for the collapse of communism in the Soviet Union and eventually Eastern Europe. The economy is the most significant aspect of every government. The soviet economy was highly centralized with a “command economy” (p.1. fsmitha.com), which had been broken down due to its complexity and centrally controlled with corruption involved in it. A strong government

Russia’s economy is very complex and also very terrible at the same time. Many other economy’s are also like this but Russia’s is a very interesting thing to learn about. Russia’s economy has many things wrong with it that in the long run could probably affected it in a negative way. But it also has many positive things about it.The negatives and the positives are, in my opinion, are equal in Russia economy.

Another repercussion of the Soviet Union’s collapse was the failure of the economies of almost every new post-Soviet country. Most of the economies of the new Republics were left in shambles after the collapse. In Russia, people were not ready for the new economic freedom that resulted from the fall of Communism. Their unpreparedness led to inflation. “Inflation caused prices to go up three hundred percent in the first month, and 2,591 percent by the end of 1992.”( Russian Economy in the Aftermath of the Collapse of the Soviet Union) Just three years after the Soviet Union’s fall, Russia’s inflation rate had skyrocketed to 2591 percent, evidencing that Russians were not prepared for such a rapid evolution, going from a communist economy into a capitalist economy. All post-Soviet countries had the same economic fate as Russia, plunging into worse economic conditions than the United States suffered during its Great Depression. For example, in 1992, the Ukraine had almost a fifteen percent drop in its gross domestic production and Latvia suffered a 33 percent drop. (GDP growth) Many of these countries’ economies are still suffering as a result of the rapid evolution

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

Russia began its reform with political liberalization, and many believe that Russia’s failure was partly due to focusing on political reform first and they should have begun with economic reforms which China had done. This lead to political turmoil so severe that in 1989-1993 workers were politically neutralized and unable to stop Yeltsin’s liberal market reforms. But, a small group of oligarchs helped to

Over the course of history different revolutions have come and gone, bringing along promises of social, economic, and political change. However, the price of change isn 't always smooth and effortless. Revolution doesn 't bring change at the blink of an eye, it takes time for the achievements of a revolution to come to full fruition. It is almost inevitable that a revolution will have its failures along the way, but these failures don 't overshadow the success of a revolution. It is not until the common good is met that a revolution is deemed successful. When I talk about the common good, I mean that which benefits society as a whole rather than an individual or a minority. The waves of revolution and presidents in Mexico from 1910 to 1946 aimed at achieving the common good, and some presidents succeeded more than others. This can be anything from social services such as free health care and education, to freedom of speech and free elections. When it comes to quantifying the success of a revolution, one must keep in mind the larger scope, not whether a revolution brings immediate change but rather change felt down the road. The most important outcome of a revolution is identifying whether or not it brings forth change. Did the waves of revolution bring change to Mexico or was this change just a mere illusion?

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.

Amid Russian Revolution years there is the chance to watch the Russian economy experiencing a few basic moves, including a portion of the most exceedingly bad things that can happen to a nation. There was war and civil war. The economy endured monetary breaking down, separation, and starvation. There was a breakdown of state limit: government prohibited Vodka.

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.

Upon being officially inaugurated on May 7, 2000, Putin’s boldness and authority acted as a saving grace for Russia and its people. Throughout the 1990s, the state of Russia’s economy, politics, and society as a whole was in constant turmoil and disarray. President Yeltsin campaigned on the basis of drastic economic change that would transform Russia from a bleak totalitarian past to a bright and promising democratic future. In order to fight the stagflation caused by the Soviet’s command economy, Yeltsin enacted measures of “shock therapy” to slowly reconstruct the failing economy. These measures included removing government price controls on numerous products, lifting wage controls on various jobs, cutting military spending to spare the budget deficit, and handing out vouchers to citizens in an effort to

Although the radical thinkers of the 18th and 19th centuries who captured the “zeitgeist” of their era contributed to shaping Western Civilization ideals, many of these radical thinkers were condemned during their lifetimes for their unorthodox views. Around the 17th century, Western European society began to adapt to a new method of thinking known as rationalism, which focused on proving beliefs with rational sources such as data and reasoning instead of faith and tradition. While William Paley was one of the first highly influential rationalist thinkers of his era, he also agreed with the orthodox views of his time. Paley was not significant for challenging his era’s views; rather for representing his era’s views while challenging society’s method of formulating these views. Contrary to Paley, David Hume actually challenged societal norms and traditions by opposing to all of Paley’s ideas with his reason, thus exposing his era to his radical skepticisms. Friedrich Nietzsche was able to criticize traditional principles of morality and culture which sparked conflict for the authoritative entities of his era. While Paley represented his era’s normative beliefs and encouraged rationalism, Hume was able to challenge his society’s religious and moral beliefs prior to Nietzsche’s critique on morality and culture during his era which ultimately influenced future political and artistic figures.

People came to accept that the faults of Yeltsin's "democrats" by the collapse of the USSR and drop in living standards. The democrats were to blame for the series of crises of the 1990s, and above all for the serious crisis of 1998 with the collapse of the ruble. Democratic models of political order lost their appeal while others wanted to readopt Communism or anything that would improve the overall quality of life. Hence, concepts of freedom and human rights were once more relegated to the margins of people's thinking becoming less democratic.