Forums / Discussion / General

170,908 total conversations in 5,479 threads

+ New Thread


Thoughts on the Dissolution of Soviet Russia

Last posted Feb 19, 2012 at 09:30PM EST. Added Feb 04, 2012 at 08:19PM EST
28 posts from 10 users

Teh Brawler wrote:

Do you haz any?

I cannot have thoughts unless all persons can have thoughts.

Feb 04, 2012 at 08:21PM EST

Piano wrote:

Why yes. Yes I do.

Would you like to share them?

Feb 04, 2012 at 08:24PM EST
Quote

The dissolution of Soviet Russia was a good thing in that it allowed for the nationalities of the Ukraine, Belarus, and more to separate themselves politically from Russia.
Also, because the dissolution allowed for Eastern Europe to begin building their own societies, resuming the process that had been interrupted by WWII and the subsequent Soviet dominance.

Feb 04, 2012 at 08:25PM EST

oh good. its that discussion.

America won, communists lost. done.

It happened a few hundred years ago so no one knows or remembers

Feb 04, 2012 at 08:29PM EST

oh gawd you made this thread in response to that post didnt you

Last edited Feb 04, 2012 at 08:30PM EST
Feb 04, 2012 at 08:30PM EST
Quote

404 user not found wrote:

oh gawd you made this thread in response to that post didnt you

Yes, yes he did

Feb 04, 2012 at 08:30PM EST

And this wasn’t started by burning_phoenix? Well…

So, yeah, my thoughts. I don’t think that I would go as far as Vladimir Putin and say that the dissolution of the USSR was a “tragedy,” but I think I would be cautious to say that the so-called “New Russia” is better. The shortages faced by the general populace in the mid-’90s were devastating, while a lucky few gained billions in wealth and now effectively run the country. In some ways, the current oligarchy is reminiscent of authoritarian Communist rule, but I think that the shift was, on the whole, a good thing, given the decrepit state of the USSR by the late ’80s.

Of course, you also have to take into account the liberation of all the satellite states; the so-called Commonwealth of Independent States. Some of them have been relatively prosperous, but many, especially the Central Asian ones, have retained the old authoritarian hierarchy, especially in Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan. So I think for many of the citizens of those countries, there is little difference between Soviet rule and the current regimes, other than the current regimes are more ethnocentric.

So, overall, I think that the dissolution of the USSR was probably a good thing, even if it wasn’t for the better in all cases.

Feb 04, 2012 at 08:30PM EST
Quote

Oh god, the TL;DR it begins!!

советская россия нахую расапалось потому что нахуй кончились деньги. и горбочов нехуя не соображал.

Last edited Feb 04, 2012 at 08:33PM EST
Feb 04, 2012 at 08:31PM EST

Teh Brawler wrote:

Would you like to share them?

Sure. Give me a couple minutes to collect my thoughts though.

Feb 04, 2012 at 08:32PM EST
Quote

>resisting the urge to copy/paste my post on the AMA thread to here.

Feb 04, 2012 at 09:07PM EST
Quote

@russianfandoratheexplorer
TL:DR




This just gives me a reason to post my favorite meme.

Last edited Feb 04, 2012 at 09:22PM EST
Feb 04, 2012 at 09:21PM EST

The dissolution of the Soviet Union was most unequivocally a shocking event to the world. The USSR, the “Red Menace”, the master of Eastern Europe, the spawning point of all “communist” countries, had collapsed.

Now, in my opinion, Gorbachev was right to introduce perestroika and glasnost. He was acting justly when he gave his people more freedom of information, and tried to reform the long stagnated Soviet economy. But, after these legislations were set forth, Gorbachev must have been in a tough situation when the protestors mobilised in Eastern Europe. Their support was so strong (And the communist party’s principles of retaliation so brutal), his two choices were to let them take over an SSR’s government, or respond with military intervention. If he chooses the former, he will be shamed for allowing a bit of the Soviet Union picked away, if he chooses the latter, he would be acting against his own principles, and slaughtering hundreds of civilians.

But, he chose the former, and one by one, the Soviet Union was becoming smaller and smaller, until finally the biggest of the Soviet Union’s SSRs, the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic, had receded. The USSR was now too weak to even continue on as a nation, and it collapsed.

This collapse, for many, marked the end of the Cold War, with America as the victor. That event, the promoting of the United States to a global influence with no competition, was one of, if not the, most powerful events that were subsequent of the collapse.

Of course, the United States had already had an upper hand for decades now, and the collapse of the Soviet Union only strengthened America in an…. Aesthetic, rather than material way. You see, even though the U.S. had been victorious for some time now, the dissolution of the USSR drastically changed public opinion, increasing patriotism and, ultimately, strengthening the American morale substantially (Which may have also inspired a “We can do whatever we want, and here’s why” attitude in some politicians).

So, what of the post-collapse countries? Well, to me, it seems that Russian politicians still think they’re competing with the U.S. Politicians, dignitaries, and the Russian media never hesitate to point out the flaws in America. Vladimir Putin is an excellent proponent to this practice.

I find the Middle-Eastern post-Soviet countries particularly interesting. Nations like Azerbaijan had always been swept up in the turmoil of the middle east, but now they were on their own. It seems only one post-Soviet Middle Eastern country got out of it pretty unscathed- Kazakhstan. Kazakhstan has a pretty strong economy and society, and its capital city is adorned with beautiful buildings.

Coming back to the Cold War, what actually marked its end is disputable. Some say it was when the USSR collapsed, some say it was when the World Trade Centers were attacked (Condoleezza Rice supposedly called upon Vladimir Putin for assistance when this happen, and declared that the United States would not be of any trouble to him or his country anymore). I personally say it ended when the Soviet Union collapsed, as it seems strange that the United States would continue the Cold War after the dissolution of the USSR by simply targeting the biggest nation that came out of the rubble.

Now, let’s say for a moment that the U.S. collapsed. After years of economic stagnation and the politicians being unable to hold control over their country, the United States of America economically and socially collapsed, either being weakened but holding together or being obliterated and splitting up. Along with it the other Western nations burst into turmoil and collapsed or were severely crippled, meaning that none of the US’s allies could take the wheel. What does this mean for the world? Well, that means that the Soviet Union, even though stagnated itself, would come out the victor of the Cold War, and its influence would rise substantially. Being the winner of such a powerful deadlock, it would also probably recover from its economic problems fairly quickly, and citizens’ morale and patriotism would rise.

With the empowerment of the Soviet Union, its vassals, if you will, would also stay fairly powerful. Places like Cuba, China, and the like would gain a subsequent boost from the USSR’s victory.

Now, let’s say that Gorbachev was still leader at this time, but because of the huge spike in patriotism within Soviet society, the protests that rocked the country in our timeline were minor in theirs. This would mean the Soviet Union would not only be intact and economically stable, but also fairly free! (Although I must put an emphasis on “fairly”).

With these conditions, the Soviet Union would not only be intact and economically stable, but also fairly free! (I must put emphasis on “fairly”, though). The Soviet Union could have been the United States of our time. They might have even gone on Middle Eastern adventures as well! But,

Last edited Feb 04, 2012 at 09:48PM EST
Feb 04, 2012 at 09:46PM EST
Quote

Feb 04, 2012 at 09:47PM EST

Piano wrote:

The dissolution of the Soviet Union was most unequivocally a shocking event to the world. The USSR, the “Red Menace”, the master of Eastern Europe, the spawning point of all “communist” countries, had collapsed.

Now, in my opinion, Gorbachev was right to introduce perestroika and glasnost. He was acting justly when he gave his people more freedom of information, and tried to reform the long stagnated Soviet economy. But, after these legislations were set forth, Gorbachev must have been in a tough situation when the protestors mobilised in Eastern Europe. Their support was so strong (And the communist party’s principles of retaliation so brutal), his two choices were to let them take over an SSR’s government, or respond with military intervention. If he chooses the former, he will be shamed for allowing a bit of the Soviet Union picked away, if he chooses the latter, he would be acting against his own principles, and slaughtering hundreds of civilians.

But, he chose the former, and one by one, the Soviet Union was becoming smaller and smaller, until finally the biggest of the Soviet Union’s SSRs, the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic, had receded. The USSR was now too weak to even continue on as a nation, and it collapsed.

This collapse, for many, marked the end of the Cold War, with America as the victor. That event, the promoting of the United States to a global influence with no competition, was one of, if not the, most powerful events that were subsequent of the collapse.

Of course, the United States had already had an upper hand for decades now, and the collapse of the Soviet Union only strengthened America in an…. Aesthetic, rather than material way. You see, even though the U.S. had been victorious for some time now, the dissolution of the USSR drastically changed public opinion, increasing patriotism and, ultimately, strengthening the American morale substantially (Which may have also inspired a “We can do whatever we want, and here’s why” attitude in some politicians).

So, what of the post-collapse countries? Well, to me, it seems that Russian politicians still think they’re competing with the U.S. Politicians, dignitaries, and the Russian media never hesitate to point out the flaws in America. Vladimir Putin is an excellent proponent to this practice.

I find the Middle-Eastern post-Soviet countries particularly interesting. Nations like Azerbaijan had always been swept up in the turmoil of the middle east, but now they were on their own. It seems only one post-Soviet Middle Eastern country got out of it pretty unscathed- Kazakhstan. Kazakhstan has a pretty strong economy and society, and its capital city is adorned with beautiful buildings.

Coming back to the Cold War, what actually marked its end is disputable. Some say it was when the USSR collapsed, some say it was when the World Trade Centers were attacked (Condoleezza Rice supposedly called upon Vladimir Putin for assistance when this happen, and declared that the United States would not be of any trouble to him or his country anymore). I personally say it ended when the Soviet Union collapsed, as it seems strange that the United States would continue the Cold War after the dissolution of the USSR by simply targeting the biggest nation that came out of the rubble.

Now, let’s say for a moment that the U.S. collapsed. After years of economic stagnation and the politicians being unable to hold control over their country, the United States of America economically and socially collapsed, either being weakened but holding together or being obliterated and splitting up. Along with it the other Western nations burst into turmoil and collapsed or were severely crippled, meaning that none of the US’s allies could take the wheel. What does this mean for the world? Well, that means that the Soviet Union, even though stagnated itself, would come out the victor of the Cold War, and its influence would rise substantially. Being the winner of such a powerful deadlock, it would also probably recover from its economic problems fairly quickly, and citizens’ morale and patriotism would rise.

With the empowerment of the Soviet Union, its vassals, if you will, would also stay fairly powerful. Places like Cuba, China, and the like would gain a subsequent boost from the USSR’s victory.

Now, let’s say that Gorbachev was still leader at this time, but because of the huge spike in patriotism within Soviet society, the protests that rocked the country in our timeline were minor in theirs. This would mean the Soviet Union would not only be intact and economically stable, but also fairly free! (Although I must put an emphasis on “fairly”).

With these conditions, the Soviet Union would not only be intact and economically stable, but also fairly free! (I must put emphasis on “fairly”, though). The Soviet Union could have been the United States of our time. They might have even gone on Middle Eastern adventures as well! But,

alas, we may never know, as the USSR collapsed, not the U.S. Anyway, this has been my super TL;DR post, thank you for reading (If you were mad enough to do so).

Feb 04, 2012 at 09:49PM EST
Quote

Piano wrote:

alas, we may never know, as the USSR collapsed, not the U.S. Anyway, this has been my super TL;DR post, thank you for reading (If you were mad enough to do so).

The USSR did go to the middle east.




Charlie Wilson’s War was based on some events that happened when the Soviet Union was in the middle east.

I watched a documentary on it, not the movie itself.

Ideologies are not important, its how resistant they are to corruption.

Last edited Feb 04, 2012 at 10:11PM EST
Feb 04, 2012 at 10:09PM EST

Sweatie Killer wrote:

The USSR did go to the middle east.




Charlie Wilson’s War was based on some events that happened when the Soviet Union was in the middle east.

I watched a documentary on it, not the movie itself.

Ideologies are not important, its how resistant they are to corruption.

I was saying that it might have invaded other middle eastern countries as well.

Feb 04, 2012 at 10:13PM EST
Quote

Wouldn’t true communism be a democracy?

Feb 04, 2012 at 11:29PM EST

Sweatie Killer wrote:

Wouldn’t true communism be a democracy?

It would be democratic, yes.

Feb 04, 2012 at 11:30PM EST
Quote

RussianFedora, have you ever considered becoming a teacher? People would learn a lot from you…

Feb 19, 2012 at 07:01PM EST
Quote

You guys- Most of that post was improvised to gain points in the CBC. It was stretched out on purpose.

Feb 19, 2012 at 08:02PM EST
Quote

Whoa, wait waaaait hold on…

Soviet Russia broke up?!?!

When the hell did this happen?

I just bought a plane ticket to Russia, so where the hell am i gonna arrive. What awaits me there?!

Feb 19, 2012 at 08:35PM EST

omgitsmr wrote:

Whoa, wait waaaait hold on…

Soviet Russia broke up?!?!

When the hell did this happen?

I just bought a plane ticket to Russia, so where the hell am i gonna arrive. What awaits me there?!

There is no more Russia. I hope you like the Ukraine and Belarus.

Feb 19, 2012 at 08:37PM EST

Kasumi Kenshiro wrote:

RussianFedora, have you ever considered becoming a teacher? People would learn a lot from you…

How so?

Feb 19, 2012 at 09:30PM EST
Quote
Skeletor-sm

This thread is closed to new posts.

Old threads normally auto-close after 30 days of inactivity.

Why don't you start a new thread instead?

O HAI! You must login or signup first!