3 ms·

But - I'm no "Sovietologist", so do enlighten me if I'm wrong about this! and though it too was stratified (to bureaucrats with country Dacha's etc.) It wasn'

But - I'm no "Sovietologist", so do enlighten me if I'm wrong about this! and though it too was stratified (to bureaucrats with country Dacha's etc.) It wasn't so stratified to mention it explicitly. Everyone had more or less the same lifestyle. And many had Dacha's, not just bureaucrats. Also, if you'd seen those dachas... E.g. four years ago I visited Stalin's dacha on the lake Ritsa. I'd say that average house of the current Russian middle class is much bigger and more luxurious than Stalin's dacha. And he was the leader of the USSR.

m0zg 5y ago
It probably was much larger than average Soviet house at the time, as well as far more luxurious. Stalin was into expensive cars and fine cuisine as well (even as parts of the country quite literally starved to death). Thing is, you don't have to be ultra-rich to feel good about yourself. You just need to be substantially richer than the next guy. And no party functionary (let alone Stalin) ever had any lifestyle issues. Dachas, yachts, personal chefs - it's par for the course until your fellow party members take you out with a pickaxe or something to free up the spot.
- anticodon 5y ago
  This is true for absolutely any world leader. I doubt that Hoover was starving during Great Depression. It's an unfair appeal to emotions: no matter how much or how little Stalin ate, it wouldn't solve hunger problem of the entire country.
  - m0zg 5y ago
    It'd solve a lot of problems if he died of starvation though, like millions of his de-facto slaves in rural Russia. Folks should remember this when they vote for commies. It always ends up like this, no exceptions.
einpoklum 5y ago
Not everyone had more or less the same lifestyle. If nothing else, you had central cities and peripheral towns and villages, and Russia vs other Soviet Republics (I know Ukraine got the shorter stick, to say the least for a very long time if not all the way to the end), etc.
- artem247 5y ago
  I don't think that major Ukrainian cities of let's say post-Stalin era were in worse shape then comparable Russian cities of the same time. You had more 'deficit' goods in Moscow sure, I don't know if Kyiv was lacking anything else to be honest. Rural/urban gap was very real though but with each decade more and more people were able to live in the cities due to extensive housing program. Around 1990-1991 there was a popular sentiment in Ukraine that we are feeding the whole Union etc, something similar was in Russia (that they subsidize other republics), the reality was a bit of a mixed bag
- anticodon 5y ago
  I know Ukraine got the shorter stick I don't think so. It's probably a propaganda of the new independent Ukraine government since 1991. Many of my relatives are stuck on Ukraine now because they moved there during USSR times because life there was better. They'd be happy to return to Russia, but they're old and they are citizens of Ukraine and if they sell their property in Ukraine, they'd be unable to buy real estate in Russia, so it's almost impossible for them to return. And they regret that dearly because of politics of nazism and poor state of economy. Not all republics in USSR were equal, but differences weren't as big as they're now. And contrary to what current propaganda says, most prosperous republics were Baltic republics and Georgia. USSR was investing a lot of money in those republics to buy loyalty. You can find numbers in the USSR statistics. For example, USSR paid more for milk from farmers in Baltic republics than it cost in the grocery shops. It was a big mistake to invest in those countries. Now they hate us the most despite all that effort and money poured there by Russia.

m0zg 5y ago

It probably was much larger than average Soviet house at the time, as well as far more luxurious. Stalin was into expensive cars and fine cuisine as well (even as parts of the country quite literally starved to death). Thing is, you don't have to be ultra-rich to feel good about yourself. You just need to be substantially richer than the next guy. And no party functionary (let alone Stalin) ever had any lifestyle issues. Dachas, yachts, personal chefs - it's par for the course until your fellow party members take you out with a pickaxe or something to free up the spot.

anticodon 5y ago
This is true for absolutely any world leader. I doubt that Hoover was starving during Great Depression. It's an unfair appeal to emotions: no matter how much or how little Stalin ate, it wouldn't solve hunger problem of the entire country.
- m0zg 5y ago
  It'd solve a lot of problems if he died of starvation though, like millions of his de-facto slaves in rural Russia. Folks should remember this when they vote for commies. It always ends up like this, no exceptions.

einpoklum 5y ago

Not everyone had more or less the same lifestyle. If nothing else, you had central cities and peripheral towns and villages, and Russia vs other Soviet Republics (I know Ukraine got the shorter stick, to say the least for a very long time if not all the way to the end), etc.

artem247 5y ago
I don't think that major Ukrainian cities of let's say post-Stalin era were in worse shape then comparable Russian cities of the same time. You had more 'deficit' goods in Moscow sure, I don't know if Kyiv was lacking anything else to be honest. Rural/urban gap was very real though but with each decade more and more people were able to live in the cities due to extensive housing program. Around 1990-1991 there was a popular sentiment in Ukraine that we are feeding the whole Union etc, something similar was in Russia (that they subsidize other republics), the reality was a bit of a mixed bag
anticodon 5y ago
I know Ukraine got the shorter stick I don't think so. It's probably a propaganda of the new independent Ukraine government since 1991. Many of my relatives are stuck on Ukraine now because they moved there during USSR times because life there was better. They'd be happy to return to Russia, but they're old and they are citizens of Ukraine and if they sell their property in Ukraine, they'd be unable to buy real estate in Russia, so it's almost impossible for them to return. And they regret that dearly because of politics of nazism and poor state of economy. Not all republics in USSR were equal, but differences weren't as big as they're now. And contrary to what current propaganda says, most prosperous republics were Baltic republics and Georgia. USSR was investing a lot of money in those republics to buy loyalty. You can find numbers in the USSR statistics. For example, USSR paid more for milk from farmers in Baltic republics than it cost in the grocery shops. It was a big mistake to invest in those countries. Now they hate us the most despite all that effort and money poured there by Russia.