Stalin was correct about industrialization in the 1930s, especially considering the external conditions and environment the soviets found themselves in. The incredible rates of industrialization were unprecedented in history, and the fact that industrialization was completed is why the heroic Red Army was equipped and able to defeat the Nazi menace.
One does not seek good when one already has it.
I am referring to Stalin’s decision to abolish the NEP, viewing it as a poison for a socialist society.
When the NEP first emerged, the common people were starving—literally swelling up from hunger—while the “NEPmen” sat in restaurants, feasting on black caviar and washing it down with Abrau-Durso champagne.
The people loathed the NEPmen; they regarded them as a hostile class.
Do you understand that the NEP represents an abyss between private enterprise and the people—both in a social and a material sense? As a temporary measure, the NEP is, of course, necessary in certain specific situations; however, if allowed to drag on, things can go so far that there is simply no turning back.
That Platoskin fellow I mentioned yesterday—well, in the wake of Putin’s crackdown, he’s had a change of heart about staging a revolution… ))) Now he wants to do everything legally, through the electoral process. Furthermore, under his proposed model of socialism, he intends to retain private business ownership. It would certainly be fascinating to see how he manages to pull that off…
“Mao’s economy was also fantastic at getting rapid growth.”
A real roller coaster… )))
It seems to me that the biggest disaster was when Mao had all the sparrows killed off.
In case you didn’t know—and whatever a snake Khrushchev might have been—he actually sent trainloads of sparrows to China once Mao realized that he had been a bit too hasty in getting rid of them.
Mao wanted war constantly. He was forever pushing the countries of the Socialist Bloc toward it. Castro and Czechoslovakia were the most outraged by this. Mao was extremely belligerent; he was constantly provoking the USSR.
It was strange to observe: on one hand, there was the practically boundless aid being provided to China, yet on the other—manifestations of outright hostility.
In the USSR during the 1970s, China was portrayed in a rather unfavorable light on television—specifically in the wake of the Damansky Island conflict and other events. Brezhnev feared that China might launch a nuclear strike. All forces were placed on combat alert, and troops were massed along the borders. Thank God, the situation was ultimately resolved peacefully. It was at Damansky Island that the BM-21 “Grad” multiple rocket launch systems were deployed for the first time—a move that, in fact, played the decisive role.
And take a look at the graph: leading up to the Damansky Island incident, China was at its peak; immediately afterward, however, it went into a sharp nosedive.
“they still did not have the same impact of undermining western production and accelerating technology transfer that Reform and Opening Up brought.”
Everything produced in the 1930s and thereafter was a copy of Western designs. Why bother developing original technology? They simply bought the product in the West and copied it.
Incidentally, there is a story relevant to this point: Khrushchev once went to Sweden on a state visit, where he saw an electric shaver for the first time—and was presented with one as a gift. He was utterly astonished and took a real liking to it. As soon as he returned to the USSR, he ordered that an identical one be manufactured—only domestically produced. His staff asked him, “How?” He replied, “However you see fit!”
The engineers dismantled the device down to the last screw, copied it, and thus the first electric shaver in the USSR was born at the FED factory. This factory holds a special place in my heart; it adjoins the aircraft plant where my mother used to work.
FED is an acronym standing for Felix Edmundovich Dzerzhinsky.
Now, regarding “socialism with a Russian twist”: on one occasion, Lenin ordered Dzerzhinsky to put an end to the problem of homelessness among children. Dzerzhinsky was a monumental figure; he was entrusted with the most complex and daunting tasks (Beria, in essence, was much the same).
Dzerzhinsky traveled to Kharkiv, rounded up all the homeless children… took them out to a ravine, and had them shot! …)))) That’s just a joke, of course…
In reality, the first labor colony for homeless children in the USSR was established. A precision electronics factory was built on the grounds of this colony, where the homeless children both worked and studied. Ultimately, the people who emerged from that institution went on to become scientists and cosmonauts… Since then, the factory has borne the name FED—though it has now been bombed by the Russians. However, had the Ukrainians realized what the acronym FED actually stood for, they would have renamed the factory long ago…))))
As for the goods that were supposedly meant to “displace” Western products in the global market: under socialism, there is no such thing as competition—there is only “socialist emulation.” Goods manufactured in the USSR could be seen en masse throughout the countries of the Socialist Bloc. They should have first ensured they had everything they needed themselves—so that, perhaps, they could compete later on.
I do not care for the “soul”
That is what sets you apart from a Russian. It sounds stupid, but it’s true.
His insistence that the USSR had abolished class was also shortsighted. These fundamental errors weakened the CPSU, and created the foundation for further errors in Gorbachev’s reforms. The CPC watched and refused to make the same mistakes.
Note that in both the first and the second case, it all began with contact with the United States. Leprosy—if one may put it that way.
Note that in both the first and second instances, it all began with contact with the United States—a sort of leprosy, if you will.
Those reforms were dictated by the West—roughly speaking. The U.S. led both men by the nose… and subsequently began leading Putin by the nose as well. Sooner or later, this had to come to an end—yet it hasn’t. Now we have the “Spirit of Anchorage” all over again; it is truly laughable to watch.
The NEP was forged in the context of a highly undeveloped Russia, with a necessity to uplift agriculture as soon as possible so as to rapidly improve industry. The hatred of the people towards the NEPmen was understandable, but a clear reading of the historical material conditions reveals that it was necessary. As long as the socialist state holds the commanding heights of industry, and maintains a vigilant eye towards any organized political resistance from the petite bourgeoisie and bourgeoisie, markets can be a complementary part to the broader socialist system in developing underdeveloped areas.
As for Mao’s economy, it was again rapid industrialization. The problem with Mao’s economy was that growth was uneven and unstable. Deng Xiaoping’s reforms stabilized and slightly accelerated development. You’ll get no argument from me that killing off the sparrows was wrong, but knowledge of agronomics was very low comparatively in China, and thus this mistake was not repeated as their knowledge advanced.
I also am not a fan of the sino-soviet split. I do not believe Mao to have been blameless for it, however, Khrushchev’s venom was correctly called out by Mao. Just as Mao wasn’t permanently good, so too was Khrushchev not permanently bad, but there’s good reason why Khrushchev’s actions enabled Gorbachev’s, which enabled Yeltsin’s.
Regarding technology transfer, certainly you can see that Chinese manufacturing is now more advanced than soviet manufacturing. In becoming the world’s factory, they not only copied western tech, but totally owned the entire production process, and now are using it to advance and develop further. There is a qualitative difference between reverse engineering every single thing you copy, and being able to simply copy what you’re already manufacturing.
All in all, I understand that I am not Russian. I am indeed a westerner, damned as I may be. However, I truly believe that I can recognize both the Chinese and Soviet approaches as immensely positive forces, and hope that Russia returns to socialism within my lifetime. I long to see the western empire fall, and I am happy to see existing socialist countries advance forward into the future despite western flailing. The west has fallen into China’s trap, and it is too late to leave. What we are witnessing is a cornered beast that has already lost, and is throwing a fit in the aftermath.
Khrushchev’s venom was correctly called out by Mao.
Like you, I also detest Khrushchev; however, as far as China is concerned, Khrushchev did nothing detrimental—in fact, he continued Stalin’s foreign policy course regarding that country.
And here is something that might surprise you: Stalin and Mao never actually shared a warm relationship. Stalin used to refer to Mao as a “radish”—red on the outside (a communist), but white on the inside (a capitalist).
but there’s good reason why Khrushchev’s actions enabled Gorbachev’s, which enabled Yeltsin’s.
Yes, I completely agree with you here. Stalin’s death was the beginning of the end for the USSR.
Regarding technology transfer, certainly you can see that Chinese manufacturing is now more advanced than soviet manufacturing. In becoming the world’s factory, they not only copied western tech, but totally owned the entire production process, and now are using it to advance and develop further.
Once again, Comrade: The factories where this “copying” took place were built using Western capital. The Western owners were undoubtedly keen to ensure those factories generated a profit, so they dispatched their own specialists to help their Chinese comrades master the technologies more quickly; equipment and machinery were provided as well.
There is no miracle here, Comrade. I played football as a child, and back then, the Germans built an Adidas factory in Moscow. I used to buy Moscow-made Adidas boots; they were indistinguishable from the originals—except that they cost several times less.
Just imagine: if there had been thousands of such factories—as there are in China—what would have happened then? Moscow-made Adidas would have completely displaced German Adidas. Does that not remind you of anything?
The only catch is that, in the USSR, you could count the number of Western-built factories on the fingers of one hand…
As for the idea of simply copying something without developing it further… Have you heard about the Korean War, where American pilots suffered a crushing defeat at the hands of Soviet airmen? The ratio was something like one to ten—I don’t recall the exact figures.
The whole secret lies in the fact that the aircraft flown by the Soviet pilots were copies of American designs—except that, in their version, the Russians altered the wing angle. And the Russians won.
All in all, I understand that I am not Russian. I am indeed a westerner, damned as I may be.
Comrade, I feel a certain sense of embarrassment before you. This is the first time I have ever heard an American speak like this.
I am pleased to hear that. When I detect a certain note of regret… I truly hope it is sincere!
What we are witnessing is a cornered beast that has already lost, and is throwing a fit in the aftermath.
You can see that a cornered beast will fight to the bitter end! A cornered beast is capable of anything!
Comrade, it is one thing to merely observe, but quite another to be right in the epicenter. I am watching Russia—quite literally—through a pair of naval binoculars.
If I were to set up a drum, grab a spyglass, put on a tricorn hat, and perch myself on that drum—well, I could easily pass for Napoleon… )))
For those of us here, all these death throes… they reverberate back to us later with excruciating pain. Just now, Ukraine struck a dormitory; many teenagers were killed. And the retaliation will come flying back—right down onto our heads…
The NEP was forged in the context of a highly undeveloped Russia, with a necessity to uplift agriculture as soon as possible so as to rapidly improve industry. The hatred of the people towards the NEPmen was understandable
Yes, the NEP was likely necessary—it was not without reason that Lenin introduced it. The peasantry had begun to resent the prodrazvyorstka (grain requisitioning system), and peasant uprisings flared up in several regions; Lenin introduced the NEP out of necessity—in part, to pacify the peasants.
However, Stalin did not abolish the NEP immediately; the policy remained in place—albeit under duress—for another four years.
Joseph Stalin viewed the New Economic Policy (NEP) not as a means of building socialism, but rather as a forced, temporary retreat designed to save Soviet power from economic ruin.
He criticized it for fostering a resurgence of capitalist elements, posing a threat of the countryside undergoing a “kulak”-driven regression, and being fundamentally incompatible with a planned economy.
Key points of Stalin’s critique of the NEP:
Resurgence of Capitalism:
Stalin argued that the NEP legalized private entrepreneurs (“NEPmen”) and stimulated the growth of the kulak class, leading to social stratification that worked to the detriment of the proletariat.
Constraints on Industrialization:
Small-scale private enterprise was incapable of providing the country with the heavy industry and advanced technology required for national defense.
The Threat of Socialist Failure:
In a speech delivered at a conference of Marxist historians (1929), he stated explicitly:
“If we adhere to the NEP, it is because it serves the cause of socialism. But when it ceases to serve that cause… we will cast it to hell.”
As for Mao’s economy, it was again rapid industrialization.
I highly value Mao’s achievements in unifying China—that is, indeed, an invaluable accomplishment.
However, it seems to me that as a politician, economist, and strategist, Mao was rather lackluster… perhaps because he was a romantic and an idealist.
And what, exactly, were his economic achievements? Mao compelled every peasant to build a furnace on their own property and cast low-quality pig iron. This is precisely what Stalin had refused to do: hand over heavy industry to small-scale cooperatives. Mao sought to boost pig iron and steel production tenfold within a decade using this method—relying on the peasants and the furnaces in their backyards. Do you consider that a sound strategic move?
The fanatical campaign to exterminate sparrows was merely a way to identify a concrete “enemy”—something to blame for poor harvests—rather than acknowledging the leadership’s own miscalculations.
The conflict with the USSR was a tactic to divert the public’s attention from the country’s true problems by designating an external enemy. At that time, China was engaged in a full-blown campaign to discredit the Soviet Union. They were plastering up all sorts of leaflets… it strikes me as very bizarre.
Meanwhile, in the USSR, the newspapers were describing China as—and you might be surprised to hear this—a “militarist” state.
One does not seek good when one already has it.
I am referring to Stalin’s decision to abolish the NEP, viewing it as a poison for a socialist society.
When the NEP first emerged, the common people were starving—literally swelling up from hunger—while the “NEPmen” sat in restaurants, feasting on black caviar and washing it down with Abrau-Durso champagne.
The people loathed the NEPmen; they regarded them as a hostile class.
Do you understand that the NEP represents an abyss between private enterprise and the people—both in a social and a material sense? As a temporary measure, the NEP is, of course, necessary in certain specific situations; however, if allowed to drag on, things can go so far that there is simply no turning back.
That Platoskin fellow I mentioned yesterday—well, in the wake of Putin’s crackdown, he’s had a change of heart about staging a revolution… ))) Now he wants to do everything legally, through the electoral process. Furthermore, under his proposed model of socialism, he intends to retain private business ownership. It would certainly be fascinating to see how he manages to pull that off…
“Mao’s economy was also fantastic at getting rapid growth.”
A real roller coaster… )))
It seems to me that the biggest disaster was when Mao had all the sparrows killed off.
In case you didn’t know—and whatever a snake Khrushchev might have been—he actually sent trainloads of sparrows to China once Mao realized that he had been a bit too hasty in getting rid of them.
Mao wanted war constantly. He was forever pushing the countries of the Socialist Bloc toward it. Castro and Czechoslovakia were the most outraged by this. Mao was extremely belligerent; he was constantly provoking the USSR.
It was strange to observe: on one hand, there was the practically boundless aid being provided to China, yet on the other—manifestations of outright hostility.
In the USSR during the 1970s, China was portrayed in a rather unfavorable light on television—specifically in the wake of the Damansky Island conflict and other events. Brezhnev feared that China might launch a nuclear strike. All forces were placed on combat alert, and troops were massed along the borders. Thank God, the situation was ultimately resolved peacefully. It was at Damansky Island that the BM-21 “Grad” multiple rocket launch systems were deployed for the first time—a move that, in fact, played the decisive role.
And take a look at the graph: leading up to the Damansky Island incident, China was at its peak; immediately afterward, however, it went into a sharp nosedive.
“they still did not have the same impact of undermining western production and accelerating technology transfer that Reform and Opening Up brought.”
Everything produced in the 1930s and thereafter was a copy of Western designs. Why bother developing original technology? They simply bought the product in the West and copied it.
Incidentally, there is a story relevant to this point: Khrushchev once went to Sweden on a state visit, where he saw an electric shaver for the first time—and was presented with one as a gift. He was utterly astonished and took a real liking to it. As soon as he returned to the USSR, he ordered that an identical one be manufactured—only domestically produced. His staff asked him, “How?” He replied, “However you see fit!”
The engineers dismantled the device down to the last screw, copied it, and thus the first electric shaver in the USSR was born at the FED factory. This factory holds a special place in my heart; it adjoins the aircraft plant where my mother used to work.
FED is an acronym standing for Felix Edmundovich Dzerzhinsky.
Now, regarding “socialism with a Russian twist”: on one occasion, Lenin ordered Dzerzhinsky to put an end to the problem of homelessness among children. Dzerzhinsky was a monumental figure; he was entrusted with the most complex and daunting tasks (Beria, in essence, was much the same).
Dzerzhinsky traveled to Kharkiv, rounded up all the homeless children… took them out to a ravine, and had them shot! …)))) That’s just a joke, of course…
In reality, the first labor colony for homeless children in the USSR was established. A precision electronics factory was built on the grounds of this colony, where the homeless children both worked and studied. Ultimately, the people who emerged from that institution went on to become scientists and cosmonauts… Since then, the factory has borne the name FED—though it has now been bombed by the Russians. However, had the Ukrainians realized what the acronym FED actually stood for, they would have renamed the factory long ago…))))
As for the goods that were supposedly meant to “displace” Western products in the global market: under socialism, there is no such thing as competition—there is only “socialist emulation.” Goods manufactured in the USSR could be seen en masse throughout the countries of the Socialist Bloc. They should have first ensured they had everything they needed themselves—so that, perhaps, they could compete later on.
That is what sets you apart from a Russian. It sounds stupid, but it’s true.
Note that in both the first and the second case, it all began with contact with the United States. Leprosy—if one may put it that way.
Note that in both the first and second instances, it all began with contact with the United States—a sort of leprosy, if you will.
Those reforms were dictated by the West—roughly speaking. The U.S. led both men by the nose… and subsequently began leading Putin by the nose as well. Sooner or later, this had to come to an end—yet it hasn’t. Now we have the “Spirit of Anchorage” all over again; it is truly laughable to watch.
The NEP was forged in the context of a highly undeveloped Russia, with a necessity to uplift agriculture as soon as possible so as to rapidly improve industry. The hatred of the people towards the NEPmen was understandable, but a clear reading of the historical material conditions reveals that it was necessary. As long as the socialist state holds the commanding heights of industry, and maintains a vigilant eye towards any organized political resistance from the petite bourgeoisie and bourgeoisie, markets can be a complementary part to the broader socialist system in developing underdeveloped areas.
As for Mao’s economy, it was again rapid industrialization. The problem with Mao’s economy was that growth was uneven and unstable. Deng Xiaoping’s reforms stabilized and slightly accelerated development. You’ll get no argument from me that killing off the sparrows was wrong, but knowledge of agronomics was very low comparatively in China, and thus this mistake was not repeated as their knowledge advanced.
I also am not a fan of the sino-soviet split. I do not believe Mao to have been blameless for it, however, Khrushchev’s venom was correctly called out by Mao. Just as Mao wasn’t permanently good, so too was Khrushchev not permanently bad, but there’s good reason why Khrushchev’s actions enabled Gorbachev’s, which enabled Yeltsin’s.
Regarding technology transfer, certainly you can see that Chinese manufacturing is now more advanced than soviet manufacturing. In becoming the world’s factory, they not only copied western tech, but totally owned the entire production process, and now are using it to advance and develop further. There is a qualitative difference between reverse engineering every single thing you copy, and being able to simply copy what you’re already manufacturing.
All in all, I understand that I am not Russian. I am indeed a westerner, damned as I may be. However, I truly believe that I can recognize both the Chinese and Soviet approaches as immensely positive forces, and hope that Russia returns to socialism within my lifetime. I long to see the western empire fall, and I am happy to see existing socialist countries advance forward into the future despite western flailing. The west has fallen into China’s trap, and it is too late to leave. What we are witnessing is a cornered beast that has already lost, and is throwing a fit in the aftermath.
Like you, I also detest Khrushchev; however, as far as China is concerned, Khrushchev did nothing detrimental—in fact, he continued Stalin’s foreign policy course regarding that country.
And here is something that might surprise you: Stalin and Mao never actually shared a warm relationship. Stalin used to refer to Mao as a “radish”—red on the outside (a communist), but white on the inside (a capitalist).
Yes, I completely agree with you here. Stalin’s death was the beginning of the end for the USSR.
Once again, Comrade: The factories where this “copying” took place were built using Western capital. The Western owners were undoubtedly keen to ensure those factories generated a profit, so they dispatched their own specialists to help their Chinese comrades master the technologies more quickly; equipment and machinery were provided as well.
There is no miracle here, Comrade. I played football as a child, and back then, the Germans built an Adidas factory in Moscow. I used to buy Moscow-made Adidas boots; they were indistinguishable from the originals—except that they cost several times less.
Just imagine: if there had been thousands of such factories—as there are in China—what would have happened then? Moscow-made Adidas would have completely displaced German Adidas. Does that not remind you of anything?
The only catch is that, in the USSR, you could count the number of Western-built factories on the fingers of one hand…
As for the idea of simply copying something without developing it further… Have you heard about the Korean War, where American pilots suffered a crushing defeat at the hands of Soviet airmen? The ratio was something like one to ten—I don’t recall the exact figures.
The whole secret lies in the fact that the aircraft flown by the Soviet pilots were copies of American designs—except that, in their version, the Russians altered the wing angle. And the Russians won.
Comrade, I feel a certain sense of embarrassment before you. This is the first time I have ever heard an American speak like this.
I am pleased to hear that. When I detect a certain note of regret… I truly hope it is sincere!
You can see that a cornered beast will fight to the bitter end! A cornered beast is capable of anything!
Comrade, it is one thing to merely observe, but quite another to be right in the epicenter. I am watching Russia—quite literally—through a pair of naval binoculars.
If I were to set up a drum, grab a spyglass, put on a tricorn hat, and perch myself on that drum—well, I could easily pass for Napoleon… )))
For those of us here, all these death throes… they reverberate back to us later with excruciating pain. Just now, Ukraine struck a dormitory; many teenagers were killed. And the retaliation will come flying back—right down onto our heads…
Yes, the NEP was likely necessary—it was not without reason that Lenin introduced it. The peasantry had begun to resent the prodrazvyorstka (grain requisitioning system), and peasant uprisings flared up in several regions; Lenin introduced the NEP out of necessity—in part, to pacify the peasants.
However, Stalin did not abolish the NEP immediately; the policy remained in place—albeit under duress—for another four years.
Joseph Stalin viewed the New Economic Policy (NEP) not as a means of building socialism, but rather as a forced, temporary retreat designed to save Soviet power from economic ruin.
He criticized it for fostering a resurgence of capitalist elements, posing a threat of the countryside undergoing a “kulak”-driven regression, and being fundamentally incompatible with a planned economy.
Key points of Stalin’s critique of the NEP:
Resurgence of Capitalism:
Stalin argued that the NEP legalized private entrepreneurs (“NEPmen”) and stimulated the growth of the kulak class, leading to social stratification that worked to the detriment of the proletariat.
Constraints on Industrialization:
Small-scale private enterprise was incapable of providing the country with the heavy industry and advanced technology required for national defense.
The Threat of Socialist Failure:
In a speech delivered at a conference of Marxist historians (1929), he stated explicitly:
“If we adhere to the NEP, it is because it serves the cause of socialism. But when it ceases to serve that cause… we will cast it to hell.”
I highly value Mao’s achievements in unifying China—that is, indeed, an invaluable accomplishment.
However, it seems to me that as a politician, economist, and strategist, Mao was rather lackluster… perhaps because he was a romantic and an idealist.
And what, exactly, were his economic achievements? Mao compelled every peasant to build a furnace on their own property and cast low-quality pig iron. This is precisely what Stalin had refused to do: hand over heavy industry to small-scale cooperatives. Mao sought to boost pig iron and steel production tenfold within a decade using this method—relying on the peasants and the furnaces in their backyards. Do you consider that a sound strategic move?
The fanatical campaign to exterminate sparrows was merely a way to identify a concrete “enemy”—something to blame for poor harvests—rather than acknowledging the leadership’s own miscalculations.
The conflict with the USSR was a tactic to divert the public’s attention from the country’s true problems by designating an external enemy. At that time, China was engaged in a full-blown campaign to discredit the Soviet Union. They were plastering up all sorts of leaflets… it strikes me as very bizarre.
Meanwhile, in the USSR, the newspapers were describing China as—and you might be surprised to hear this—a “militarist” state.