How good or bad was everyday life in Soviet Union or Maoist China (Roman, 90s)

[Dd714]

Originally Posted by boulevardofdef

Years ago I read an article written by a travel writer who had visited Poland before the fall of Communism. He told a story that stuck with me about witnessing people lined up for an hour or more to drink soda from a metal cup that was chained to the counter. Later I was talking to a guy who grew up in Poland in that era and mentioned the story to him. I was honestly expecting him to say, "That's silly -- it was never that bad." Instead he said, "I think I was in that line."

It interesting to talk to people that grew up behind the iron curtain. Now they are all over the internet, or for me, they are my co-workers. Two converstations stick with me:

1.) An internet exchange in the late 90s with one guy asking someone from the former Soviet Block country what he felt about his new freedom, the ability to go anywhere, do anything, make his own decisions. The response was something like this: "You know, it is good. But many don't like it. Now we must make decisions, decide where to work, where to go, what to buy. It is good but in many ways life was much simpler and easier under the Soviet plan. The government made decisions for you, it was simpler, less confusing."

2.) An exchange in a China hotel bar on a business trip with my co-worker who grew up in Tito's Yogoslavia regarding the lack of privacy in China. His comments: "I will tell you how it works because China, although they have many freedoms now, still is like where I grew up with - that hotel clerk at the front desk, that guy carrying luggage, our employees at the plant todays - some of them have second jobs. They write who (western business visitors) you are, they write who you are meeting, they write where you go...then at the end of the day they give it to someone, someone that works for the government. That is there second job, to watch what others do."

[totsuka]

I always wonder why people in Communist nations or Socialist nations think some services were or are free. Education, medical care, etc....someone pays for it via taxes or denial of freedom, but it was not free.

[ukrkoz]

It was what it was. Samooborona Bez Oruzhiya, or SAMBO, was claimed to be strictly pure bread Soviet development and likely was allowed simply because of patriotism. Also, it was considered defensive style and MA-s offensive.
No, they did not teach self defense in militaries, unless you were in Specnaz or Black Berets. The so called Sea Infantry, Morskaya Pehota, had them too. But in Specnaz they taught soldiers martial arts just fine. Not really Chinese ones, but karate was indeed. My best buddy was in elite Specnaz troops, "dlinnyy zabros". remote dispatch. They were trained for diversions inside enemy territory, Like you see, eg, in Red Dawn. Groups of 6 soldiers. They were one way ticket, not considered to be able to return alive.
Military service was "honorable duty" of every male citizen who reached age 18. You get your passport at 16. You could get delay while you are at high educational institution, like university of technical institute, but they all had military "faculties", or departments, so you graduate with lieutenant rank and are drawn to active service right away.
Service, in my times, was 2 years land forces and 3 years Navy.
Militaries were probably worse than jail. Hazing was cruel, predatory. Many lives were lost just because of that. 1st six months of service you are practically a slave to "dyedy", Grandpas. Soldiers that are 6 mhts before de-mobilization. Elite troops, like Specnaz or KGB though had NONE of hazing. It was not tolerated and rooted out ruthlessly.
Food in regular militaries was terrible. Dyedy had all the good stuff, greenhorns lived off cabbage and some porridge. Unless you had a buddy or relative among Dyedy, then you'll be "protected". It was bad.
There was a lot of hatred between Asian draft and "white people". Rule was to mix various nationalities together to ensure international fraternization, but in reality Uzbeks stayed with Uzbeks, Tadzhiks with their own. And so on. I think Navy was less plagued with "dyedovshchyna", hazing. In law was in Navy, he had no issues. Far as I know, hazing was non existent in Afghanistan, reason being - everyone had live ammo and was in battles. For one, you must be a team, or you get killed. Then, if you really try to be an ass and Dyed, what keeps a greenhorn from sending a bullet between your ears on the battle field? No idea how it was in air forces.
You could wiggle out of service with certain illnesses, flat feet. You had to go through MIlitary Commission to be "de-commissioned" and get "white military certificate" that will clear you from service. Then they will try to get you again every so many years.
Homosexuality was "no service" but then again, if you claim that, you get 8 years in jail for being homosexual. Yes, it was in penal code. So 2 years of service vs 8 years in jail... And in jail, "urki", or inmates, will turn you into a "pietuh", a rooster - a brutalized malewhore for anyone. There were no luxuries like conjugal visits in that system.
Soldiers outside Navy and Air Force/KGB/elite troops were basically a free labor force. For government projects or generals etc.

[ukrkoz]

Huh. I was to Poland countless times. I am biologically half Polish by paternal line. I had Polish language in me. I spoke Polish so well that Polaks had no doubt I am native born one. I have been to Warsaw, Opole, several more cities. I have never ever seen any chained cups or any lines to drink a soda to start with.
"Countries of the socialist camp" as were called all the Warsaw treaty ones, lived quite different life. It was much more "ample" comparing to the USSR one. They were considered "abroad", zagranitsa, and what they manufactured was much better quality than what we had and considered sought "import". Indeed, getting a quality pair of shoes made in the USSR was practically impossible. We had a huge shoe factory in my city - and product was junk. Polish or Yugoslavian shoes were considered on the same level as say Italian of Brazilian ones. You couldn't wear them out and everyone had maybe two pairs of shoes at the best. Keep in mind, everyone was walking everywhere.
But "abroad" had all kinds of capitalist luxuries - Coke, what not. I seriously do not believe that story.
"Abroad" also had much less censorship and those who could learn one of their languages, had luxury of say reading Godfather in complete edition. We had three out of eight chapters printed for general public in USSR. Rest was removed. Knowing Polish allowed me to read a lot of books as they were and listen to less restricted radio.
Music was same way. Most of the Western music was considered a "rotten capitalist influence" and was unavailable. Actually, a lot of this was justified. You know "western music" better than I do. Much of propaganda of violence, drugs, sex, last etc.

[ukrkoz]

I need to say something.
It is very easy to judge that country based on generally available propaganda. For decades, USSR and then Russia, being the one and only biggest "enemy to the west" was portrayed only one way - in black color.
But do not forget, ever since 1905 or so, that part of the world was under non stop attack. First, Russian emperors blood line had to be destroyed. Then, Russia had to be brought to its knees and become "concessions heaven" for international capital. Which was almost accomplished by its emissaries, 160 "bolsheviks" shipped to there and, after Great October Revolution, practically giving country away to monopolies to use as they please. Bloodbath that followed took millions and millions of population away. I am still not sure on exact number, but it's roughly over 100 000 000 people.
Then, when in 1927 this was put to an end, when Trotsky was expelled from the country, gears shifted and now Germany was unleashed onto Russia to take the riches back and break it down. That didn't work but ever since, onslaught never stopped. "hot" war changed to Cold War, but war it was. And country that is under continuous siege has to live by the laws of military times. Close to martial laws. So a lot of what was done was done as a forced measure. Not because of the evil nature of the country.
Anyone who reads this, should he or she have been in place of that country leaders and had clear understanding of what forces were involved and what was their goal - would have been likely to do same. Protection of the country comes first, sometimes - at hefty price.
That being said, by far, I am not a USSR apologet. But there were reasons, most do not know, for what was done. Sure thing, mixed on infamous Russian character too.
What makes me wonder much more is something different. That is - what a great country that managed to servile all attacks for 700 years and still stay powerful. Unbelievable. That itself deserves fair credit.

[Yac]

I'm a Pole, I'm 32. These metal cups on a string/chain - I don't remember them, but I heard about them from my parents. They were there, 40 or so years ago.
Another very "neat" feature of these centrally planned economies were the shortages. Somehow one would think that if there's a central plan, at least things like this wouldn't happen, but no. There were times when getting... toilet paper was almost impossible. When asked about it my Mother told me once about the "best Christmas they had" - she was 20 something (so it was the 70's) and by pure luck, she stumbled upon some men selling (probably stolen...) toilet paper, she bought as much as she could carry and not only was this "the best gift" as there were very few goods in the stores you could actually buy and everybody needed tp, but also it was great for bartering and she managed to secure a feast for the family.
The state was so inefficient, people had to steal to survive. And only the state had anything that could be stolen. This unfortunately echoes till now, many people consider the state "the enemy", even if they don't admit it, despite the fact that we've had democratically elected governments for 26 years now.
Additionally, from what I can remember from the PRL era (The Polish People's Republic - Polska Rzeczpospolita Ludowa, PRL) is that in my small home town, everyone that could had a garden, chickens, many people had relatives in the nearby villages and they funded some of the livestock there - growing your own was the only real and sure way to eat good food.
Finally, we were the lucky ones - we lived only a stones throw from the German border, when it opened up suddenly "paradise" became available, the paradise some of you might know as Aldi We also got packages from our family in the US, with clothes, toys, sweets. For a kid with resourceful parents like mine, the short time I lived under PRL wasn't half bad
For those that were actually aware of what was going on, it was something everybody was hoping would end soon.
Yac.

[Old Gringo]

Beyond bad.

It was downright lousy.

In China, famines killed many thousands on a semiregular basis.

[ohio_peasant]

It's pleasantly surprising to learn that there are so many ex-Soviet citizens active on this board. Almost without exception, I find their vignettes and explanations to be accurate and free of exaggeration. There's little that I could add in terms of facts, but I would like to contribute some tidbits of philosophy.

First, on the question of "freedom", such as freedom to travel internationally. This matters to those who are enthused about such things, but is insensible or irrelevant to most others. For a person who lacks the money or the interest to travel abroad - and this is what percentage of Americans? - hermetically sealed-boarders are a purely theoretical restriction. To say a scientific researcher who wishes to present his work at international conferences, such a restriction is most onerous and stultifying.

Second, the flip-side of freedom, is the freedom to fail. In America today we have the embarrassing problem of college-graduates from fine universities, with good grades, who are unemployed or underemployed. In the Soviet system this could have happened only if said graduates committed (or were accused of committing) some transgression. Employment in the profession for which one studied in college was virtually guaranteed. It might have meant involuntary relocation and a redirection away from one's personal interests, but it was a job within one's field.

Externally-imposed constraints also bought one deniability. Psychologically, this is very important. If one made a stupid decision in life, or just grossly miscalculated, it was possible to blame stupid external limitations. In a "free" society it is the person who fails who is blamed for his/her failure. If at work a project went badly, it could always be blamed on obsolete equipment, on shortages of raw materials, on corrupt officials, on misallocation of resources. From an employee viewpoint, and especially from a management viewpoint, this is incredibly... liberating.

There are also various collateral benefits to a restrictive, socialized world. Because of shortages of agricultural labor, or at least perceptions thereof, at harvest-time there was occasionally compulsory conscription of students to pick potatoes and the like. Whole classes would empty out, with improvised camps of young-people set up to supposedly help the peasants with agricultural chores. Effective? No, of course not. But this was an excellent opportunity for male engineering students to mingle with female humanities/arts students. This is completely unthinkable in America, but in Soviet times such boondoggles were handy for solving problems in dating.

In fact the whole subject of dating and relationships offers remarkable contrast between then-and-now, east-and-west, and I'm not at all convinced that the modern/Western approach is superior. The fewer choices that one has, the more readily one accedes to whatever happens to be at hand. This is restrictive to the best and most appealing candidates, but for the mediocre ones, it provides a floor underneath their feet.

This is all aptly summarized in the usage of one word: "Ambition". In America, to be ambitious is laudable. It's a positive quality, encouraged in children and extolled as an ideal, as a drive towards progress. In the USSR, ambition connoted conniving deceit and insolence. To be "ambitious" meant to deny one's connection to one's fellow man, to abuse resources and to arrogate to oneself unseemly gains.

[Unsettomati]

I'll leave the discussion of China for others.

As for the USSR, the question really is a matter of who, when and where.

Life in the rural Ukraine in the early 1930s would have been pretty bad. Life in Leningrad in 1942 would have been horrific. On the other hand, life during the Khruschev thaw, with the war years well in the past and the dismantling of the Gulag and the economy doing about as good as it was ever going to do and the liberalization of laws allowing greater expression and some dissent, would have been comparably good (note to those getting their hackles raised - I said 'comparably'). The Brezhnev years saw economic stagnation and a rolling back to some extent of what was allowed under his predecessor, but was still a far cry from the insanity under Stalin (and Lenin).

Being an ethnic Russian obviously helped. Being Jewish or Muslim, and to a lesser extent openly Christian, or German or Estonian or Lithuanian or a Tatar (or any number of a great many other minorities), and to a lesser extent Ukrainian or Belarusan, would have been relatively disadvantageous.

Of course, being a party member meant various perks, increasing with how high one rose. The party was far and away the best means of social mobility, though a career in the sciences could also allow some significant movement.

But in general, there was less in the way of pretty much everything - liberty to do various things, to go where one wanted to go, to be who one wanted to be, and of the basic necessities of life.

[Dd714]

Originally Posted by Old Gringo

Beyond bad.

It was downright lousy.

In China, famines killed many thousands on a semiregular basis.

State planned famines in both the Soviet Union and Maoist China didn't kill thousands, it killed millions.