如果 Lavrentiy Beria 在 1953 年接替斯大林，会发生什么？
苏联经历了三个主要的分岔路口，我们本可以在这些分岔路口变成像今天的中国那样成功的一党制、以市场为基础的国家寡头政治。其中一次发生在 1953 年。斯大林去世后，苏联特工部门全能的头目拉夫连季·贝利亚成为下一任苏联统治者的热门人选。
在他任职的几个月里，贝利亚尝试了一些与邓小平 1978 年的改革没什么不同的步骤。
- 以牺牲共产党工作人员为代价，将部分权力移交给政府的技术官僚
- 缓解政府对集体化农民的压力
- 结束出于意识形态动机的镇压和对非政治犯人的广泛特赦
- 试水欧洲与西方的政治和经济合作。
- 结束朝鲜战争。
贝利亚的一些外交政策举措在接下来的几十年里仍然没有实现，比如德国的重新统一和与日本的和平条约。
贝利亚的“中国方案”比安德罗波夫改革方案成功的机会大得多被戈尔巴乔夫搞砸了。50 年代初的苏联实际上很像 70 年代后期的中国：
- 我们在农村仍然有大量劳动力可以释放出来，以支持城市低成本制造业的扩张
- 如果国家允许，农村人口仍然记得如何以私人农民的身份经营企业
- 在大清洗的流血之后，我们殖民地和附属地的民族精英仍然顺从和束手无策。
补充阅读
Lavrentiy Beria 是苏联领导层中合法的自由主义者吗？
斯大林二战后的外交政策是否涉及输出共产主义的侵略性意识形态驱动，或者只是为了维持现状和边界安全？
下面，Lavrentiy Beria（右）在 Joseph Stalin（左）和Nikolai Yezhov的陪同下（中）在 1938 年提防人民的敌人。
到 15 年后斯大林去世时，贝利亚似乎是斯大林为数不多的追随者之一，他们在屈从之下仍保留了有远见的政治家的品质。在我们秘密警察克格勃的贝利亚继任者的羽翼下，在苏联瓦解马克思主义项目的过程可能不仅仅是巧合。
Alex Foster’s answer has some basis but goes too far. For example, it is true that Beria was prepared to sacrifice the East German regime, but as part of a deal with the West in which Germany would be unified as a demilitarized neutral state. Although at the time Beria was denounced for this by his rivals, at the end of the 1950s Khrushchev revived the idea. It didn’t happen because the West, committed to NATO with (West) Germany inside it, wasn’t buying it. However, the idea was realized in the case of Austria.
Beria would have tried hard to strike advantageous deals with the West, but I find
Nothing different from Khrushchev or others
- Repeat: Khrushchev or Beria whoever succeeded Stalin couldn't have done much, the destruction of soviet Union was set during Lenin days itself.
- First Beria appeared liberal because he tried to set few things right especially those paranoid policies of dying Stalin 1.) He intended to project himself as a reasonable person 2.) To build a support base and consolidate his position in Party.
- Same was done by Khrushchev but had to roll-back quickly once a revolt occurred in Hungary, same would have happened with Beria, he would have been much brutal than othe
Like Stalin , Beria was highly intelligent and a capable administrator. Even though he abused his power to his own personal advantage , he understood the need to change the Soviet system as a whole into a less repressive one and to allow greater intellectual and personal freedom .
However , he did not have the great degree of genuine popular support that Stalin enjoyed and had made himself many enemies within the “nomenklatura “. In 1939 Stalin is said to have commented to von Ribbentrop that Beria was “ our “ Himmler “ . In fact , his demise in 1953 was entirely predictable .
It is likely he at least contributed his death, if not outright murdered.
The official cause of death of Josif Stalin was stroke (cerebral hemorrhage on his left brain lobe), which seriously impaired his breathing, locomotion and speech. Stalin was known of his binge drinking, chain smoking, very unhealthy diet and lack of excercise, so anything like that was bound to happen sooner or later.
For weeks, Josif Stalin had been plagued with dizzy spells and high blood pressure. His personal physician, Professor V. N. Vinogradov had advised that Stalin step down as head of the government for health r
Beria was killed because he planned economic reforms with America’s financial help. Khrushchev, Molotov and others feared this would be destabilizing. Beria was practical, not driven by ideology.
Neither did he have ethics, morals and decency. He was effective, pragmatic and went in the direction of whatever worked.
Beria understood the need for a “quid pro quo” to secure this aid. He proposed offering concessions to the western countries as part of a deal for their help.
Beria stated:
- “To improve foreign relations it was reasonable to transfer the Kaliningrad Oblast to Germany, part of Karelia to
One of the great strengths of Iosif Stalin, extolled by Stalinists and anti-Communists alike, was his extraordinary cerebral personality. He was an equal-opportunity guy in picking both allies and victims. He never let his feelings or personal quirks get in the way of important things.
The only person who seemingly was exempted from the cold calculus of his decisions was his daughter Svetlana. Otherwise, no one in his mind seemed to have any intrinsic value to him that elevated them above anyone else.
This included his sons. He was estranged from the two older ones, Yakov and Konstantin, for too
Wait, Joseph Stalin died? I didn’t know that! When did it happen?
In 1953? How did I miss that? How did you miss that? That was almost sixty-five years ago! And look, the Soviet Union no longer exists, either! When did that happen? Where did the Berlin Wall go? Why am I typing on this thing? It’s like a typewriter hooked up to a TV screen or something, what is it?
TAKE ME BACK TO 1953!
So, what you are asking is “what would I do if offered (by Stalin, I assume) to be his successor?” Let me tell you first what happened to other Stalin’s successors.
Successor #1. Sergey Kirov.
Murdered 1934.
Successor #2.
Executed 1938
Successor #3. A. Kuznetsov (Leningradskoe delo) Executed 1950.
There are more names nobody remembers now.
So, what would I do? Run. As fast and as far as I could. Trotsky was, reputably, the smartest Lenin’s pupil, and he ran all the way to Mexico.
Still, he was assassinated by KGB goons in 1940.
Because even if he was a truly awful human being, Beria was a highly skilled and intellingent man. He started his career very young in local Communist parties and his willingness to work hard and his ruthlessness paved him the way to Stalin.
While exhamining him, however, one should take in account several points:
- He grew up in what Stalin himself called a "bloody" and "cutthroath" culture, the Georgian one. The fact that he shared the same birthplace as Stalin also helped him earning his trust.
-He was very intelligent and hardworking. It is to note that he passed school with the highest gra
Georgy Malenkov basically lost the struggle for power (and policies) against Nikita Khrushchev and his supporters.
After Stalin’s death in March 1953, the Malenkov’s colleagues/rivals in the Party leadership were naturally wary of concentrating full power again in the hands of one person, especially as they were not ready to accept his undisputed rights for this role. Thus, just a few days later, he was forced to resign from the Party Secretariat, to be effectively replaced by Khrushchev.
For the next two years, a sort of ‘duumvirate’ existed, with Khrushchev as a Party leader (First Secretary)
On the surface, the main reason was that Beria, in the period between Stalin’s death and his own overthrow, was advocating many highly “progressive” reforms such as abandoning socialism in East Germany, freeing many political prisoners, allowing more autonomy in the Nationalities, an end to forced collectivization, and an increase in light industry. Of course from a Stalinist perspective all this would have been regressive not progressive (although Stalin himself was initially in favor of liberalization in East Germany, but that’s a tangent too big for parentheses). Its remarkable however how
留言
張貼留言