Figure 1.--. |
|
A Russian reader discusses modern Russia with us. He points out that there were positive aspects to the old Soviet Union and benefits offered by the Communist regime which he misses in modern Russia. One of the fascinating aspects of the internet is the ability to meet and exchange ideas with people from all over the world. Our discussion here began with a consideration of trade unions in the Soviet Union and America, but then expanded into a general discussion of the Soviet Union and modern Russia. The discussion it seems to us was very interesting and worth posting on HBC. Our reader raises some very interesting issues.
Да, я знаю про профессиональные союзы в Вашей стране. Я согласен, что
наши профсоюзы работали под руководством коммунистической партии. Но
при всех недостатках коммунистического строя было много того, что
уничтожать не следовало. Кстати, школа Соединенных штатов очень многие
вещи взяла из опыта советской школы еще в 70-х годах. Классическое
российское образование намного превосходит образование в американских
школах, это неоспоримый факт. Правда сейчас его пытаются сломать,
переделать под заграничные варианты образования, но это ошибка,
которую скоро поправят. Но я отклонился от темы. Про профсоюзы:
бесплатное медицинское обслуживание в советском союзе во многом
финансировалось именно профсоюзами. Была разветвленная сеть
профилактических медицинских учреждений, куда рабочие ездили
совершенно бесплатно. В том числе в таких престижных местах, куда
сейчас средний российский гражданин не может позволить себе поездку. А
тогда спокойно ездили и отдыхали, лечились. Внешкольный отдых детей,
профилактика их здоровья тоже осуществлялось за счет профсоюзов. Да,
согласен, забастовок у нас не было. Вернее почти не было. В 60-х годах
при Хрущеве были серьезные забастовки в Ленинграде, Новочеркасске и
некоторых других местах. Именно из-за недовольства политикой. Конечно
такие выступления быстро пресекались, но тем не менее они имели место.
Но в общем, конечно, профсоюзы были не такие как у Вас. Да, Dennis,
благодаря продукции Holliwood создается впечатление, что профсоюзы в
США очень тесно связаны с организованной преступностью и управляются
ими. Может это и не так на самом деле, но многие фильмы именно это
говорят. А американские фильмы про Россию без смеха смотреть
невозможно. В них никогда нет и сотой доли правды. У нас разные страны
не только потому что у нас было коммунистическое правление, а у вас
нет. Если вы приедите к нам, вы, возможно, будете сильно удивлены тем
что увидите. В хорошем смысле удивлены а не в плохом. Многие
иностранцы открывают настоящую Россию только после того, как побывают
у нас в стране. Никому не секрет, что наша пропаганда многие
десятилетия говорила о том, какая плохая страна Америка. Ваша
пропаганда и средства массовой информации наоборот, твердила
американцам о том, какая плохая страна Россия. Но если взять наши две
страны и сделать из них одну, взяв лучшее у вас и лучшее у нас - вот
было бы хорошее государство! Тот капитализм, который сейчас у нас пока
еще "дикий". Немного богатых при подавляющем большинстве бедных. Но
богатство у вас и богатство у нас совершенно разные вещи. Лично я
больше 20 лет был военным. Старший офицер в чине капитана 3 ранга (или
майора если приравнивать к сухопутным чинам). Если пересчитать мою
пенсию на доллары США выйдет чуть больше 150$ в месяц. По вашим меркам
я наверное отношусь к самым бедным людям. По нашим - я не бедный и не
богатый. На жизнь хватает, а вот на большее уже не хватит. Чтобы учить
дочку в университете надо от 2500 до 4500$ в год. И не важно, что она
знает два иностранных языка. А раньше она училась бы бесплатно. У меня
есть несколько рукописей книг, все говорят что хорошие, но чтобы
издать книгу надо примерно 3000$. Это я себе позволить не могу. Как
видите, Dennis, всё в мире относительно. Но это я снова отклонился от
темы письма, извините.
Ну, рад был помочь Вам чем могу.
Всего доброго.
Here is a computer translation of our reader's e-mail. It needs to be edited because of the limitations of computer translations. A HBC reader has helped improve the original computer translation.
Yes, I know about trade unions in your country. I agree that our trade
unions worked under the leadership of the Communist Party. But with all
deficiencies in the Communist system, there was much that was worth keeping.
By the way, the school of the United States took a great deal from the
experience of the Soviet school even in the 70's. Classical Russian
education is much superior to education in American schools; this is an
unquestionable fact. True, now they are to trying to break it, to change it
into a foreign version of education, but this is an error, which will soon
be corrected. But I am deviating from my theme. About the trade unions: free
medical care in the Soviet Union was largely financed by trade unions. There
was a branched network of medical establishments for preventative care,
where workers could go completely free of charge. This includes such
prestigious places, to which the average Russian citizen can no longer allow
himself to go. But at the time, they went, rested and were treated without
any problem. Extra-scholastic leisure of children and the preventive
maintenance of their health was also achieved on account of the trade
unions. Yes, I agree, we did not have any strikes. Actually, we almost
didn't. In the 60's during Khrushchev's leadership, there were serious
strikes in Leningrad, Novocherkassk and some other places. These were
specifically because of dissatisfaction with policy. Of course, such
incidents were rapidly stopped, but nevertheless they occurred. But on the
whole, of course, trade unions were not like yours. Yes, Dennis, because of
Hollywood productions, there is an impression that trade unions in the USA
are very tightly connected with and controlled by organized crime. Maybe it
isn't so, but many films portray precisely this. But it is impossible to
watch an American film about Russia without laughing. There is never even
one percent of the truth in them. Our countries are different, not only
because we had a Communist administration, while you did not. If you visit
us, you maybe absolutely amazed by what you see. In the good sense of
amazed, not the bad. Many foreigners discover the real Russia only after
they stay in our country. It is no secret that our propaganda, for decades,
claimed that America was a terrible country. Your propaganda and media on
the other hand, told Americans what a terrible country Russia is. But if we
take our two countries and make them one, after taking the best of yours and
the best of the ours, that would be a good country! The capitalism, which we
have at the moment, is still "wild". A few rich with the overwhelming
majority poor. But riches for you and riches for us are completely different
things. Personally, I spent more than 20 years in the armed forces. A senior
officer with the rank of captain 3rd grade (or Major to take the army
equivalent). If we convert my pension into US dollars it be slightly more
than $150 per month. In your estimation I must be one of the poorest people.
In our estimation, I am neither poor nor rich. It is enough to live on, but
not for anything more. For my daughter to attend university needs from $2500
to $4500 per year. And it is not important that she knows two foreign
languages. But previously, she would have attended free of charge. I have
several manuscripts of books, which everyone says are good, but in order to
publish a book one needs about $3000. I don't have the resources. As you
see, Dennis, everything in the world is relative. But I apologise, I have
once more deviated from the theme of my letter. But I am happy to offer what
help I can. All the best."
Our reader raises several important points. Some of them in particular I think merit discussion.
I tend to agrree with our Russian reader about Soviet schools. Although I have limited information, my general impression is that there were rigorous academic standards which I think our reader is correct in some if not many areas were superior to that of American schools. I would suggest, however, that there was a very important difference in
American and Soviet schools. American students were allowed to question their teachers. This is especially true in the social sciences. It was possible to disagree with the teacher and even criticise poitical leaders. I doubt if Soviet students were aloowed to disagree with Government policies or criticize Soviet leaders (at least the ones in power at the time). Now my guess is that Communists would consider this to be a weakneness. I see it as an important reason why America has been so successful. Why was it for example that the Soviet Union turned out more engineers and scientists than America, but America
maintained a significant lead in technology during the Cold War?
Our reader is no doubt correct the Soviet Union provided benefits that Russians do not
have today such as education, free health care, day care, extensive recreational facilities, ect. Certainly the Russian Revolution opened educational and career possibilities to the working class. I suppose that HBC's respons would be that Communism is not needed to have such social benefits. Countries throughout Europe have created systems offering extensive benefits to a wide cross-section of the public, including the working class. Ruropean countries, for example, have free health care and the standards of care are well above those that were provided the average Soviet citizen.
My next reaction is that the benefits our Soviet reader mentions were gained at a terrible price, a price paid by both the Soviet peope and the people of neighboring countries. The number of people killed by Stalin in the Soviet Union alone actually exceeded the number of people killed by the NAZIs. The best known Stalinist attrcities were the Ukranian famine, the Great Terror, and the Gulag which accounted for deaths in the tens of millions. Every level of Soviet society was affected. Stalin's purges of the Soviet military were one of the reasons that the Red Army and air Force performed so poorly when the NAZIs invaded. Further attrocities followed when Stalin took control of Eastern Europe.
Now I supose it could be said that that the attrocities are Stalin's crime and not the responsibility of the Communist system. It is certainly true that Stalin was an exceptionally evil person. The domensions of the attricities was no doubt in pat due to Stalin himself. We believe, however, that such actions were the likely outcome of any leadership under Communism. Even before Stalin there were attrocties under Lenin and after Stalin there were attrocities. The level of the killing was, however on a much smaller scale than furing the stalinist era. There are two basic political problems with Communism. First is that Communists claim to have a scientific understanding as to the evolution of human society. Possession of absolute truth means that there can be little tolleration of those who disagree with you and justifies a wide range of actions against those not in possession of such absolute truth. This is the same outlook as held by religious fanatics dominaring theocratic regimes. Second with the Communist Party in total control of the state and implement of state power there are none of the check and ballances of democratic governments which allow the abuse of state power.
We certainly do not mean for this discussion to be a criticism of the Soviet people. We believe that the Soviet people played a decisive role in the history of the 20th century by their bravery and sacrifice in the defeat of NAZI Germany. Of course it is also true that Stalin played a major role in launching the war when he signed the NAZI-Soviet Non-Agression Pact (August 1939). It is true that the Soviet Union was invaded by the NAZIs. It is also true that the Soviet Union was a partner with NAZI Germany in launching World War II. The Soviets invaded or seized terriory from Estonia, Finland, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, and Romania. Our point is the Soviet people prevailed in the great endevor to defeat NAZI Germany in spite of rather than because of Stalin and Communism.
The other comment I would make is that it was Communism itself that limited the economic development of Russia. Part of this was the totalitarian natire of the state, the other was the economic inefficencies of the system. Look at Russia today. With all the competet engineers and scietists, what does Russia manufacture and export? As far as
I know there are virtually no Russian products that can compete on the world market (cars,
computers, electronics equipment, washing machines, entertainment, pharaceuticals, ect.) Russia is living on oil exports. This is the model of a third world country with no competent and educated citizenry. Why are Russian companies unable to produce high quality consumer goods? I would be interested in how Riussians view this question. My answer is 1) the legacy of Communist inefficent economics and 2) an educational system that does not encourage dissent and inquiry.
A HBC reader writes, "Personally I agree with much of what the Russu=ian writer says. We commonly think of the Soviet system as a bad thing, because of its relative poverty in comparison to the west and because of its oppression of its people. I think there is little doubt that the Soviet system caused more human suffering than the Tsarist regime before it, with the level of executions and incarceration for trivial and non-existent reasons during the 20s and 30s particularly, but extending well into the 50's. But from the time of Khrushchev, leaving aside the lack of free speech, there was relatively little oppression and over the whole communist era, living standards in the Soviet Union rose dramatically. There are still parts of the world, which regret the passing of the Soviet Union. I have spent some time in Dushanbe, Tajikistan, and I am sure that people there, living on $20 or less per month, with minimal foreign investment or domestic resources to improve their economy, regret the loss of the Soviet financing that gave them one of the largest Aluminium factories in the world and some of the largest hydro-electric power stations. Without the Soviet Union, they lack the resources to run these industries effectively. Returning to the question of freedoms, a Soviet citizen might admit to not having freedom of speech - but could then point to other freedoms that we don't have in the west. Anyone who has had their personal life intruded upon by the press or been vexed by constant marketing campaigns by telephone, email or (perhaps more in the past) door to door salesmen, may appreciate the freedoms a Soviet citizen had. Personally, I prefer my freedoms - but bombarded by spam and telemarketing, I wonder if freedom of speech has been allowed to become too much more important than the freedom not to have to listen to someone else." [Buttimore] [HBC note: There is no doubt that our reader is correct in noteing that the appauling mass killings ceased after the Stalinist era. It must be remembered, however, that Soviet repression in Eastern Europe such as the crushing of the Hungarian revolution occurred under Khrushchev. The rapid fall of Communist regimes in Eastern Europe after the threat of Soviet military intervention is a reflection of popular attitudes. The situation in CentraL Asia is different. There is no doubt that the Soviets helped modernize the area. The economic benefyrs, however, need to be balanced not only with political repression, but also with widespread environmental damage. The economic issue is also important. The economic problems in Central Asia has like those in Russia itself are in large measure the result of the Communist ecconomic system. Here we would suggest that the freedom of expression which our reader seems to regard as a minor matter ie not only the heart of soul of Western civilization but one of the key factors as to why Western economies have delivered such high living standards. We say this because freedom of expression is a necessary adjunct to 1) creativity, 2) property rights, and 3) the rule of law.]
Buttimore, Roderic. E-mail message, July 11, 2005.
Navigate the Boys' Historical Clothing Web Site Baltic Pages:
[Estonia]
[Latvia]
[Lithuania]
Navigate the Boys' Historical Clothing Web Site:
[Return to Main Soviet break-up page]
[Return to Main specific war and crisis page]
[Introduction]
[Activities]
[Biographies]
[Chronology]
[Clothing styles]
[Countries]
[Bibliographies]
[Contributions]
[FAQs]
[Glossaries]
[Satellite sites]
[Tools]
[Boys' Clothing Home]