被背叛的社会主义_苏联解体的背后.epub
被背叛的社会主义_苏联解体的背后.epub
苏联为什么会解体？
自1991年以来，对于为什么会发生这种情况有多种解释，然而大多数解释都没有考虑到该事件的许多其他方面，特别是地下经济、戈尔巴乔夫就任中央政治局总书记之前的苏联成就，以及其他许多方面。
在罗杰-基兰和托马斯-肯尼的出色研究中，苏联解体的原因还有很多。
正是地下 "私营 "经济（Keeran和Kenny认为是第二经济）的无节制崛起影响了戈尔巴乔夫的格拉斯诺和改革政策，最终导致了苏联的崩溃。
被背叛的社会主义》的编排是按时间顺序进行的，首先是叠加了中央社会主义学院内部的两个派别，苏联内部第二经济的发展，以及戈尔巴乔夫时代。
下面将对每个部分进行简要解释。苏联的崩溃不是一个人自发的事件，也不是社会主义内部固有的故障。
随着研究的深入，苏联内部存在着两种倾向，并且在1985年戈尔巴乔夫成为元老级人物时，这两种倾向相互合作。
根据基兰和肯尼的说法，
第一个倾向是中央政治局委员的小资产阶级部分。
这一部分起源于尼古拉-布哈林的代表苏联农民的理论，这在当时是苏联社会的一个重要部分。
党内的这一派别对社会主义和共产主义的信念相对空洞，后来斯大林的五年计划的成功（加上对这一派别的普遍清洗）结束了小资产阶级派别，或者说人们认为是这样。
这个派别在尼基塔-赫鲁晓夫于1953年至1964年担任秘书长期间起死回生。
赫鲁晓夫的政策几乎与布哈林的政策如出一辙；
从通过 "处女地 "运动建立新农田的无结果的冒险
（这种冒险浪费了关键的经济资源，而这些资源本可以用来升级现有的农田，从而提供更好的收成），
大量使用化肥，尽管这种使用在俄罗斯的气候条件下吐口水，以及对工业和农业生产采取更分散的方法
（这导致令人难以置信的不一致的增长数字，减缓经济增长，虽然苏联经济仍然增长）。
在某种意义上预示着
戈尔巴乔夫，赫鲁晓夫的外交政策
（具有讽刺意味的是斯大林在1953年预示的）和
"解冻 "也给苏联带来压力。
前者依赖美国（一个一心想要摧毁社会主义、共产主义和苏联的国家）的仁慈，
后者则对苏联和如何向社会主义迈进提出了深思熟虑的批评，
尽管 "解冻 "最终出于对美国生活的相信，主张与社会主义完全相反。
简而言之，赫鲁晓夫的政策是在寻找一条清晰而容易的共产主义道路，而这只有助于破坏这条道路，并导致向资本主义的回归，这是戈尔巴乔夫在近20年后完成的事情。
赫鲁晓夫所做的，无论是有意还是无意，都是在建立第二经济。
这个第二经济，依靠中央计划的第一经济，是一个基于私人倡议的经济。
这种经济从第一种经济中吸取养分：
某些公民，不管是经理还是工人，都会从工业中偷取货物，在其他地方而不是在商店里以不同的价格出售。
为了使这样的行动顺利进行，这些公民会试图收买主管人员、官员，甚至是行动中的党员领导。
这就是为什么中央政治局，特别是在勃列日涅夫时期，往往会忽视这种公然的腐败。
第二经济不仅涉及偷窃货物，还涉及滥用容忍私有财产的苏联法律
（允许农民有一小块土地，所有家庭都有二级私人住宅），
以及从苏联境外走私货物。
这反过来又给第一经济（苏联经济）带来了大量的压力，它将提高工业生产来解决从未出现过的短缺问题。
正是这种第二经济给中央政治局常委内部的小资产阶级派别带来了新的活力。
在赫鲁晓夫于1964年下台和农民阶级的萎缩（到1970年代占人口的20%）之后，该派别将在参与第二经济的人中找到代表。
虽然最初声称找到了一条快速和容易实现共产主义的道路，
但随着时间的推移，
这一派别变得越来越支持资本主义，
这要归功于苏联的知识分子异议人士。
1985年戈尔巴乔夫成为元老级人物时，苏联有一些亟待解决的问题，尽管基兰和肯尼指出，
戈尔巴乔夫回想起来严重夸大了这些问题。
戈尔巴乔夫很快就会代表中央社会主义学院的小资产阶级派别，
前者只不过是一个来自斯塔夫罗波尔
（一个以党的官员的度假胜地而闻名的小镇）的傲慢的白板职业政治家，
他在苏联各地的旅行较少，在西方的时间较多，
同时对他所参加的中央社会主义学院有怨恨
（基兰和肯尼打趣说，戈尔巴乔夫就相当于一个拉斯维加斯市长成为美国总统）。
戈尔巴乔夫的政策的结果是什么？
戈尔巴乔夫将扼杀CPSU对苏联政治
（人民代表大会完全是一个国家运作的机构，而不是一个党的机构）、
苏联经济（通过消除中央计划和建立自由竞争）、
苏联文化（通过引入故意反共的知识分子，对党、党的历史，特别是斯大林编造奇妙的指控）
的控制。
公民遭受痛苦。全国各地出现了食品和其他物品的短缺
（在我看来，社会主义面包线的刻板印象源自戈尔巴乔夫时代，当时社会主义正在被瓦解）。
党对国家的控制权的丧失让亲资本主义和亲分裂主义的异见者有了发言权，他们很容易在日益不满的群众中获得支持。
在外交政策上，戈尔巴乔夫向美国屈服，对民族解放斗争置之不理，在东欧集团垮台时无所作为，并在美国掠夺世界时为其加油。
棺材里的最后一根稻草是1991年8月的未遂政变，它为俄罗斯亲资本主义的分离主义分子提供了方便的借口，使他们能够禁止中央社会主义学院，并最终解散苏联。
这本书非常容易阅读，研究无懈可击，而且信息量很大。
在阅读过程中，我没有发现太多可批评的地方，对于之前没有研究苏联经验的作者来说，
《被背叛的社会主义》就苏联解体的原因展示了非常有说服力的左翼论点。
对于想了解戈尔巴乔夫时代的人来说，这本书绝对值得一读。
通过www.DeepL.com/Translator（免费版）翻译
通过www.DeepL.com/Translator（免费版）翻译
Why did the Soviet Union collapse? Ever since 1991, there have been multiple explanations as to why that happened, yet most of them fail to take into account many other aspects of the event, specifically the underground economy, Soviet achievements prior to Mikhail Gorbachev’s accession to the post of General Secretary of the CPSU, and many others. In Roger Keeran’s and Thomas Kenny’s excellent study, there were many more reasons as to why the Soviet Union collapsed. It was the unchecked rise of the underground “private” economy (the second economy, according to Keeran and Kenny) that influenced Gorbachev’s policies of glasnost and perestroika, which ultimately brought down the USSR.
The organization of Socialism Betrayed is chronological, starting with an overlay of two factions within the CPSU, the growth of the second economy within the USSR, and the Gorbachev era. A brief explanation of each section will be presented below. The collapse of the Soviet Union was not a spontaneous event perpetrated by one man, nor was it an inbuilt malfunction within socialism. As the study goes through, there were two tendencies that were present within the Soviet Union, and both cooperated with each other in 1985, when Gorbachev became GenSec.
The first tendency was, according to Keeran and Kenny, the petty-bourgeois section of the CPSU. This section originated from Nikolai Bukharin’s theories of representing the Soviet peasantry, which was then a large section of Soviet society. This faction within the Party had a relatively hollow belief in socialism and communism, and the subsequent success of Stalin’s Five-Year plans (along with the general purging of the faction) put an end to the petty-bourgeois faction, or so it was thought. This faction returned from the dead with Nikita Khrushchev’s tenure as GenSec from 1953 to 1964. Khrushchev’s policies nearly echoed those of Bukharin; ranging from a fruitless venture of establishing new farmlands through the “Virgin Lands” campaign (a venture that wasted crucial economic resources that could have been used to upgrade already present farmland, thus providing better harvests), rampant use of fertilizer even though such use spat in the face of Russian climate conditions, and a more decentralized approach towards industrial and agricultural production (which caused incredibly inconsistent growth figures, slowing economic growth down, although the Soviet economy still grew). In a sense of foreshadowing Gorbachev, Khrushchev’s foreign policy (ironically foreshadowed by Stalin in 1953) and the “Thaw” also put strain on the USSR: the former relied on the benevolence of the US (a country bent on destroying socialism, communism, and the USSR) and the latter on providing thoughtful criticism on the USSR and how to advance towards socialism, even though the “Thaw” ended up advocating the exact opposite of socialism out of a believed rosy picture of US life. In short, Khrushchev’s policies were looking towards a clear and easy path towards communism, and it only helped undermine that path and cause a return towards capitalism, something that Gorbachev accomplished nearly two decades later.
What Khrushchev done, whether intentional or unintentional, was establish a second economy. This second economy, relying on the centrally-planned first economy, was an economy based on private initiatives. That economy leeched off of the first economy: certain citizens, be they managers or workers, would steal goods from the industry and sell them at a different price elsewhere instead of in stores. In order for such an operation to work, those citizens would attempt to buy off supervisors, officials, and even Party leaders in the operation. That was why the CPSU, especially during the Brezhnev years, would often overlook such blatant corruption. The second economy did not also involve stealing goods, it also involved abusing Soviet laws that tolerated private property (which allowed a small plot of land for the farmer and a secondary private house for all families), and smuggling goods from outside of the USSR. This in turn put large amounts of stress into the first economy (the Soviet economy), which would raise industrial productions to address shortages that were never present. It was this second economy that brought new life into the petty-bourgeois faction within the CPSU. After Khrushchev’s ouster in 1964 and the shrinking of the peasant class (which represented 20% of the population by the 1970s, the faction would find representation in those who took part in the second economy. While initially claiming to have found a quick and easier path towards communism, this faction became increasingly pro-capitalist as time went by, thanks towards intellectual dissidents of the USSR.
The organization of Socialism Betrayed is chronological, starting with an overlay of two factions within the CPSU, the growth of the second economy within the USSR, and the Gorbachev era. A brief explanation of each section will be presented below. The collapse of the Soviet Union was not a spontaneous event perpetrated by one man, nor was it an inbuilt malfunction within socialism. As the study goes through, there were two tendencies that were present within the Soviet Union, and both cooperated with each other in 1985, when Gorbachev became GenSec.
The first tendency was, according to Keeran and Kenny, the petty-bourgeois section of the CPSU. This section originated from Nikolai Bukharin’s theories of representing the Soviet peasantry, which was then a large section of Soviet society. This faction within the Party had a relatively hollow belief in socialism and communism, and the subsequent success of Stalin’s Five-Year plans (along with the general purging of the faction) put an end to the petty-bourgeois faction, or so it was thought. This faction returned from the dead with Nikita Khrushchev’s tenure as GenSec from 1953 to 1964. Khrushchev’s policies nearly echoed those of Bukharin; ranging from a fruitless venture of establishing new farmlands through the “Virgin Lands” campaign (a venture that wasted crucial economic resources that could have been used to upgrade already present farmland, thus providing better harvests), rampant use of fertilizer even though such use spat in the face of Russian climate conditions, and a more decentralized approach towards industrial and agricultural production (which caused incredibly inconsistent growth figures, slowing economic growth down, although the Soviet economy still grew). In a sense of foreshadowing Gorbachev, Khrushchev’s foreign policy (ironically foreshadowed by Stalin in 1953) and the “Thaw” also put strain on the USSR: the former relied on the benevolence of the US (a country bent on destroying socialism, communism, and the USSR) and the latter on providing thoughtful criticism on the USSR and how to advance towards socialism, even though the “Thaw” ended up advocating the exact opposite of socialism out of a believed rosy picture of US life. In short, Khrushchev’s policies were looking towards a clear and easy path towards communism, and it only helped undermine that path and cause a return towards capitalism, something that Gorbachev accomplished nearly two decades later.
What Khrushchev done, whether intentional or unintentional, was establish a second economy. This second economy, relying on the centrally-planned first economy, was an economy based on private initiatives. That economy leeched off of the first economy: certain citizens, be they managers or workers, would steal goods from the industry and sell them at a different price elsewhere instead of in stores. In order for such an operation to work, those citizens would attempt to buy off supervisors, officials, and even Party leaders in the operation. That was why the CPSU, especially during the Brezhnev years, would often overlook such blatant corruption. The second economy did not also involve stealing goods, it also involved abusing Soviet laws that tolerated private property (which allowed a small plot of land for the farmer and a secondary private house for all families), and smuggling goods from outside of the USSR. This in turn put large amounts of stress into the first economy (the Soviet economy), which would raise industrial productions to address shortages that were never present. It was this second economy that brought new life into the petty-bourgeois faction within the CPSU. After Khrushchev’s ouster in 1964 and the shrinking of the peasant class (which represented 20% of the population by the 1970s, the faction would find representation in those who took part in the second economy. While initially claiming to have found a quick and easier path towards communism, this faction became increasingly pro-capitalist as time went by, thanks towards intellectual dissidents of the USSR.
When Gorbachev became GenSec in 1985, there were desperate problems that needed to be addressed in the USSR, though Keeran and Kenny pointed out that Gorbachev heavily exaggerated those problems in retrospect. Gorbachev would quicky represent the petty-bourgeois faction of the CPSU, whom the former was nothing more than an arrogant blank-slate career politician from Stavropol (a town known for being a resort getaway for Party officials) who travelled less across the Soviet Union and more time in the West while at the same time having a grudge against the CPSU that he was a member of (Keeran and Kenny quipped that Gorbachev would be the equivalent of a Las Vegas mayor being President of the US). What were the results of Gorbachev’s policies? Gorbachev would throttle CPSU control over Soviet politics (the Congress of People’s Deputies was exclusively a state-operated institution instead of a party one), the Soviet economy (by eliminating central planning and establishing a free-for-all), Soviet Culture (by bringing in deliberately anticommunist intellectuals who cooked up fantastic accusations towards the party, its history, and Stalin in particular). Citizens suffered. There were shortages of foodstuffs and other goods across the country (in my opinion, the stereotype of socialist breadlines originated with the Gorbachev-era, where socialism was being dismantled). The loss of Party control of the state gave voices towards pro-capitalist and pro-separatist dissent, who easily gained support among the increasingly discontent masses. Foreign policy-wise, Gorbachev caved towards the US, turning its back towards national liberation struggles, did nothing when the Eastern bloc fell, and cheered on the US as it pillaged the world. The final neck in the coffin was the August coup attempt of 1991, which gave the convenient excuse for the Russian pro-capitalist separatists to ban the CPSU, and eventually dissolve the Soviet Union.
The book was very easy to read, flawless in its research, and downright informative. I did not find much to criticize while reading, and for authors who had no prior research experience towards the Soviet Union, Socialism Betrayed displays a very convincing left-wing argument as to why the Soviet Union collapsed. It is definitely worth reading for anyone who wants to understand the Gorbachev years.
The book was very easy to read, flawless in its research, and downright informative. I did not find much to criticize while reading, and for authors who had no prior research experience towards the Soviet Union, Socialism Betrayed displays a very convincing left-wing argument as to why the Soviet Union collapsed. It is definitely worth reading for anyone who wants to understand the Gorbachev years.
留言
張貼留言