3 ms·

If everything was great why people brought down the system? Is it maybe because everything worked thanks to having customer(the USSR) for ideological reasons an

by mrtksn 3y ago

If everything was great why people brought down the system? Is it maybe because everything worked thanks to having customer(the USSR) for ideological reasons and not because it was actually competitive or good? Maybe this was the reason why the factories and everything shut down when USSR was gone? IMHO the ideological markets are very dangerous, gives you the wrong feedback on your output and makes you completely reliant. USSR pumps oil, digs minerals and uses the income from that to purchase stuff from Bulgaria not because Bulgaria is the best(it might have been the best or very good at one point) but because politics. Then Bulgaria doesn't have proper feedback and instead of investing to advance its computer business keeps doing the same when the west with their real markets leaps ahead. Then one day the only customer who bought Bulgarian stuff for ideological reasons is gone and Bulgaria finds out that they don't have any customers anymore because they didn't invest in advancing their tech because they didn't need to. Unfortunately, the west today has a similar problem of ideology based markets but its nowhere nearly as bad as the situation in Communist Bulgaria. One argument might be, if the system worked why wouldn't keep doing it? Because its again very dangerous. If the USSR survived and Bulgaria was kept being the tech powerhouse of USSR with a few nodes behind the state of the art, Bulgaria might have been compelled to send the troops for the invasions USSR might have started because that's how empires work(Bulgarian economy collapsing the moment Russia decides not buying from Bulgaria since it disobeys). Notice that the Russian soldiers in Ukraine come from far eastern regions of the Russian federation, that would have been the fate of Bulgaria today.

acd1357 3y ago
The factories went bankrupt because of corruption as far as I know. An often cited scheme in the press was that the management will buy raw materials at higher than normal prices and sell the products at low prices, of course in exchange for bribes. Other sectors of the economy were similarly brought down in various ways. Trade was not done only with the Eastern Bloc, so you can’t blame everything on the loss of those markets. The people who wanted democracy didn’t anticipate all that corruption and lack of accountability.
- mrtksn 3y ago
  The economy was organised around USSR and suddenly it didn't made sense anymore once USSR was gone. The corruption on epic scale happened when restructuring was going on. The restructuring had to happen, but of course it shouldn't have had been handled that bad.
thriftwy 3y ago
> Bulgaria might have been compelled to send the troops for the invasions USSR might have started List of countries which happily participated in USA's invasion of Iraq wants to say hello!
- softg 3y ago
  A list that includes Bulgaria, funnily enough
- mrtksn 3y ago
  Hello to the list too. How many Bulgarians died in Iraq? That would be 13 soldiers. Unfortunate but that's really not the same as being a tool of an empire. The American way works the other way around, they usually are for free market until you sell its enemies weapons or help finance the war. They also do questionable things but IMHO it's a much better deal overall.
  - thriftwy 3y ago
    It does look like a better deal, but only quantitatively. Instead of being a sledgehammer of the empire you get to be a xylophone mallet. And not without its own drawbacks, as discussed elsewhere.
    - mrtksn 3y ago
      The roles are not actually analogous, the soviet one is very predatory, the western one is structured more like a partnership. Bulgaria is part of EU and NATO and does have voting power that they did use all the time. The market is also a true open market, which means if Bulgarian companies have to truly compete and if the deal no longer work for Bulgaria one day, they can leave the partnership and not lose everything overnight.
      - thriftwy 3y ago
        > the soviet one is very predatory The Soviet one that you have drawn in your head is predatory. In real life, USSR went into Afghanistan alone as far as I know. Bulgaria meanwhile could dedicate efforts towards making PCs. In the USA-satellite open market situation, Bulgaria gets to send cheap workers to fill positions in the EU as well as offers for its brightest minds, treated as a flyover country. No PCs. The voting situation WRT Warsaw pact and Comecon was likely the same. Bulgaria can't vote anything useful in either ones.
malkia 3y ago
It was inevitable, but also this was a factor - https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2016/01/21/oil-price-and-russian-politics-a-history https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2016/01/21/oil-pric...

by mrtksn 3y ago

acd1357 3y ago

The factories went bankrupt because of corruption as far as I know. An often cited scheme in the press was that the management will buy raw materials at higher than normal prices and sell the products at low prices, of course in exchange for bribes. Other sectors of the economy were similarly brought down in various ways. Trade was not done only with the Eastern Bloc, so you can’t blame everything on the loss of those markets. The people who wanted democracy didn’t anticipate all that corruption and lack of accountability.

mrtksn 3y ago
The economy was organised around USSR and suddenly it didn't made sense anymore once USSR was gone. The corruption on epic scale happened when restructuring was going on. The restructuring had to happen, but of course it shouldn't have had been handled that bad.

thriftwy 3y ago

> Bulgaria might have been compelled to send the troops for the invasions USSR might have started List of countries which happily participated in USA's invasion of Iraq wants to say hello!

softg 3y ago
A list that includes Bulgaria, funnily enough
mrtksn 3y ago
Hello to the list too. How many Bulgarians died in Iraq? That would be 13 soldiers. Unfortunate but that's really not the same as being a tool of an empire. The American way works the other way around, they usually are for free market until you sell its enemies weapons or help finance the war. They also do questionable things but IMHO it's a much better deal overall.
- thriftwy 3y ago
  It does look like a better deal, but only quantitatively. Instead of being a sledgehammer of the empire you get to be a xylophone mallet. And not without its own drawbacks, as discussed elsewhere.
  - mrtksn 3y ago
    The roles are not actually analogous, the soviet one is very predatory, the western one is structured more like a partnership. Bulgaria is part of EU and NATO and does have voting power that they did use all the time. The market is also a true open market, which means if Bulgarian companies have to truly compete and if the deal no longer work for Bulgaria one day, they can leave the partnership and not lose everything overnight.
    - thriftwy 3y ago
      > the soviet one is very predatory The Soviet one that you have drawn in your head is predatory. In real life, USSR went into Afghanistan alone as far as I know. Bulgaria meanwhile could dedicate efforts towards making PCs. In the USA-satellite open market situation, Bulgaria gets to send cheap workers to fill positions in the EU as well as offers for its brightest minds, treated as a flyover country. No PCs. The voting situation WRT Warsaw pact and Comecon was likely the same. Bulgaria can't vote anything useful in either ones.

malkia 3y ago

It was inevitable, but also this was a factor - https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2016/01/21/oil-price-and-russian-politics-a-history https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2016/01/21/oil-pric...