5 ms·

In the three decades Stalin was general secretary, the Soviet Union had enormous economic growth. Russia went from being a backward peasant country ruled by a

In the three decades Stalin was general secretary, the Soviet Union had enormous economic growth. Russia went from being a backward peasant country ruled by a czar, to being the first country to send a satellite to space. Its success and its example were what was feared. While unemployment was 25% in the US in 1933, the USSR was charging forward, and US and European firms and workers were going there to work. On Stalin's death, Khrushchev announced economic growth was no longer a priority, and other such policies, and stagnation set in. China also had enormous economic development under the communist party from 1949 to 1978, and from 1978 to now (although the party took a right turn under Deng Xiaoping in 1978, to where some question if China was socialist after then). The average inflation-adjusted hourly wage in the US is below what it was 45 years ago, leading to anti free trade Trump and Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio Cortez. Also Corbyn, Syriza, Brexit, ping-pong from Lula to Bolsonaro, TARP bank bailouts plus the carbon externalities destroying the planet. Of course, I don't think a traditional Marxist worldwide communist revolution of factory workers led by Leninist parties will happen. The present economic system might be eradicated though. It has not been all that long since European kings were having their heads chopped off or were being bayoneted to death in basements.

averros 8y ago
Of course, the Stalinist "economic growth" was built on the bones of millions forced into slavery. Do you really consider this kind of growth desirable or sustainable?
- claudiawerner 8y ago
  Not to excuse the brutalities of the Stalinist regime, but isn't our own economic growth built today on almost intolerable conditions in sweatshops, child labour and qualitatively bad ways of living life in various parts of the world and even closer to home?
  - v_lisivka 8y ago
    No. :-/ Can you provide examples of recent innovation, which was performed using child labor and caused significant growth of economy?
    - claudiawerner 8y ago
      I wasn't talking about innovation, the parent commenter and I were talking about "growth" and probably "value". Child labour has declined but is still prominent today: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_labour#Child_labour_incidents https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_labour#Child_labour_inci...
  - x220 8y ago
    The difference is that in Soviet Russia, people were forced to work in labor camps. In many developing countries, adults and children work of their own free will in bad conditions because it's the best option they have.
    - claudiawerner 8y ago
      Isn't this the same justification for the horrible conditions during the industrial revolution? If the system mandates that the only good option to live life is to work under such conditions of your own 'free will', doesn't mean that there's a problem with the system? Aren't you ignoring the effects of structural (rather than merely direct, as we saw in the USSR) violence? Here's a quote dated 1864 from "Dr. Simon", the chief medical officer of the Privy Council and the official editor of the “Public Health Reports,” says: “In my fourth Report (1863) I showed, how it is practically impossible for the workpeople to insist upon that which is their first sanitary right, viz., the right that, no matter what the work for which their employer brings them together, the labour, so far as it depends upon him, should be freed from all avoidably unwholesome conditions. I pointed out, that while the workpeople are practically incapable of doing themselves this sanitary justice, they are unable to obtain any effective support from the paid administrations of the sanitary police.... The life of myriads of workmen and workwomen is now uselessly tortured and shortened by the never-ending physical suffering that their mere occupation begets.” Have conditions improved elsewhere in the world today compared to 1863 England? Is there any justification, other than an economic one, for someone's only option to be living such a qualitatively depraved and horrid life, only of production, even if better than other options? It's hard to believe that you're making an excuse for child labour by saying it's the best option they have. If it's the best option they have then we should damn make sure it's not.
x220 8y ago
The USSR wasn't charging forward. It was charging into starvation, gulags, and genocide.
- StudentStuff 8y ago
  The USSR accomplished quite a bit coming from a nation of malnourished serfs that were formerly used as cannon fodder. Breaking up the existing communes and murdering the Soviets (then using their name) were terrible things, but its impressive that a landlocked country with minimal infrastructure and an uneducated populace could fight off Germany and liberate most of Northern Europe, push the bounds of science, and be a world power for a number of decades despite having half the populace of the other world power of that era.
  - x220 8y ago
    >liberate most of Northern Europe You mean liberate them just to enslave them again? You list many achievements of the USSR that are certainly impressive, I just don't think they matter on the whole to the people who lived (and starved to death and were murdered) in the USSR.
    - StudentStuff 8y ago
      Sounds like you seek to ignore & bury history. This is a path that leads to few positive outcomes.
StudentStuff 8y ago
Note that South Korea, Japan and others also went through rapid industrialization and economic improvement during this time. I don't think China is a great model, their development was supercharged by demand from the USA for products made with low cost labor. What Cuba accomplished wrt education & lifespan (they live longer than us Americans!) is quite impressive. The USSR managed quite a feat too (being a world power for quite a few decades) for essentially being a landlocked country with minimal infrastructure and an uneducated population of serfs that was half as numerous as us Americans. Breaking up the existing communes and murdering the Soviets (then using their name) were terrible things though.
gandhium 8y ago
> In the three decades Stalin was general secretary, the Soviet Union had enormous economic growth. China also had enormous economic development under the communist party from 1949 to 1978 Suprisingly (or rather unsurprisingly) they've also managed to starve tens of millions along with their 'growth'.

averros 8y ago

Of course, the Stalinist "economic growth" was built on the bones of millions forced into slavery. Do you really consider this kind of growth desirable or sustainable?

claudiawerner 8y ago
Not to excuse the brutalities of the Stalinist regime, but isn't our own economic growth built today on almost intolerable conditions in sweatshops, child labour and qualitatively bad ways of living life in various parts of the world and even closer to home?
- v_lisivka 8y ago
  No. :-/ Can you provide examples of recent innovation, which was performed using child labor and caused significant growth of economy?
  - claudiawerner 8y ago
    I wasn't talking about innovation, the parent commenter and I were talking about "growth" and probably "value". Child labour has declined but is still prominent today: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_labour#Child_labour_incidents https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_labour#Child_labour_inci...
- x220 8y ago
  The difference is that in Soviet Russia, people were forced to work in labor camps. In many developing countries, adults and children work of their own free will in bad conditions because it's the best option they have.
  - claudiawerner 8y ago
    Isn't this the same justification for the horrible conditions during the industrial revolution? If the system mandates that the only good option to live life is to work under such conditions of your own 'free will', doesn't mean that there's a problem with the system? Aren't you ignoring the effects of structural (rather than merely direct, as we saw in the USSR) violence? Here's a quote dated 1864 from "Dr. Simon", the chief medical officer of the Privy Council and the official editor of the “Public Health Reports,” says: “In my fourth Report (1863) I showed, how it is practically impossible for the workpeople to insist upon that which is their first sanitary right, viz., the right that, no matter what the work for which their employer brings them together, the labour, so far as it depends upon him, should be freed from all avoidably unwholesome conditions. I pointed out, that while the workpeople are practically incapable of doing themselves this sanitary justice, they are unable to obtain any effective support from the paid administrations of the sanitary police.... The life of myriads of workmen and workwomen is now uselessly tortured and shortened by the never-ending physical suffering that their mere occupation begets.” Have conditions improved elsewhere in the world today compared to 1863 England? Is there any justification, other than an economic one, for someone's only option to be living such a qualitatively depraved and horrid life, only of production, even if better than other options? It's hard to believe that you're making an excuse for child labour by saying it's the best option they have. If it's the best option they have then we should damn make sure it's not.

x220 8y ago

The USSR wasn't charging forward. It was charging into starvation, gulags, and genocide.

StudentStuff 8y ago
The USSR accomplished quite a bit coming from a nation of malnourished serfs that were formerly used as cannon fodder. Breaking up the existing communes and murdering the Soviets (then using their name) were terrible things, but its impressive that a landlocked country with minimal infrastructure and an uneducated populace could fight off Germany and liberate most of Northern Europe, push the bounds of science, and be a world power for a number of decades despite having half the populace of the other world power of that era.
- x220 8y ago
  >liberate most of Northern Europe You mean liberate them just to enslave them again? You list many achievements of the USSR that are certainly impressive, I just don't think they matter on the whole to the people who lived (and starved to death and were murdered) in the USSR.
  - StudentStuff 8y ago
    Sounds like you seek to ignore & bury history. This is a path that leads to few positive outcomes.

StudentStuff 8y ago

Note that South Korea, Japan and others also went through rapid industrialization and economic improvement during this time. I don't think China is a great model, their development was supercharged by demand from the USA for products made with low cost labor. What Cuba accomplished wrt education & lifespan (they live longer than us Americans!) is quite impressive. The USSR managed quite a feat too (being a world power for quite a few decades) for essentially being a landlocked country with minimal infrastructure and an uneducated population of serfs that was half as numerous as us Americans. Breaking up the existing communes and murdering the Soviets (then using their name) were terrible things though.

gandhium 8y ago

> In the three decades Stalin was general secretary, the Soviet Union had enormous economic growth. China also had enormous economic development under the communist party from 1949 to 1978 Suprisingly (or rather unsurprisingly) they've also managed to starve tens of millions along with their 'growth'.