Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
No it won't, because now it depends on the foreign investements - i.e. back to the square one, to the pre-revolutionary times. This was the kind of dependency that was impeding the development of Russia, and the kind of dependency that Bolsheviks set Russia free from.
And the practice immediately shows, that as soon as Russia starts pursuing her national interests ( such as taking Crimea back for example,) the chain is immediately yanked by the West in the form of "economic sanctions."
This whole "dependency" arrangement is not going to end up well yet again, as far as I can see.
"Brilliant Russian scientists" never worked "just to receive a Volga or Lada" as form of motivation - you Kartstic know NOT what you are talking about. Motivation doesn't come only in a form of desire of material rewards. There is motivation of higher kind, when people are rewarded by their own achievements ( when it comes to intellectual jobs,) by respect they command in the society, ( and among their own peers); there is motivation of ideological/nationalist nature (i.e. of spiritual nature.) The Westerners living in material world often do not understand those things.
However there were plenty of not-so-brilliant representatives of Soviet bureaucracy, whose motivation was solely "Volga and Lada," and they were the ones who at the end sold their country to the US, since they were craving BMWs instead of "Volgas."
Karstic you are as clueless here as ever - no "soviet buildings" could be "sold for "exorbitant price" in the Soviet Union, since they ALL belonged to the government and even the apartments couldn't be "sold" - only received from the government for usage per family OR exchanged.
"Under the form of privileges" - yes, but when it comes to "money abroad" - that came by the end of the Soviet system, and particularly after the crash of it. And that's what brought the economic disaster.
Powerful states don't live in the vacuum - they have to support their interests, and that costs money/resources.
..
Yes it was part of Soviet exports, as much as it was during the pre-revolutionary times.
Plenty of people knew what was going on in Caucasus and Asian republics, but Russians were looking at it as in "You can't change the non-Europeans and their ways of life, so we have to give them a slack."
As you know very well, people living under communism were the most materialistic people in the world. In fact, the "new man" or "homus sovieticus" is the most materialistic human that has existed on the face of the earth. And yes, of course, millions abroad from corruption. That money was used in reprivatization. People wanted money, to travel outside, to live like rich Russians live now....all that about "recognition of society"..sound like communist b.s.
The blame of the big disgrace of Russian communism was not "foreigners", but the Tzars that lived in a world of fantasy giving their back to the world.
Raw materials, the main bulk of exports of the USSR and the US are raw materials "leontieff theory"·
The apartments were "given" as a reward, and in many cases discounted from salaries by the state.
What has Crimea to do with the economic success of Russia? More with the economic success of the new Tzar.
Can someone explain? Both were created and taken to the extreme by evil psychotic people, both ended up being responsible with unfathomable amount of deaths, both promote a thoroughly disgusting ideology that will ultimately only lead to unimaginable amounts of suffering to those that embrace it, both deserve to go into the dustbin of history and never even uttered ever again, both have ultimately failed at everything they ever espoused.
All you need to do is speak to someone who grew up in a Communist country and you will find extreme anger at Communism.
Personally, I'm much more scared of Communism than I am of Fascism. Fascism needs an identifiable group of winners to be promoted, and a group of losers to whom all society's ills are blamed. It is disgusting, but inherently cannot spread beyond its core identifiable group, or it starts to moderate. Others not of this group will inherently not want this sort of thing to spread, and it will have many enemies. Hence, fascist regimes never survive for long. If a fascist regime takes hold, I'll know fairly quickly if I am a targeted group or not. If I'm targeted, I can flee. If I'm not targeted, then I can help. While long term stability is not going to happen, there's significant short term opportunism to keep things in play.
Communism, on the other hand, does the same thing, but not to a readily identifiable group. Hence, nobody is safe in a Communist country, and communist leaders have an unchecked view of what they want to do. When nobody is safe, helping others is a risk fewer are willing to take. The only way to stay ahead is corruption. If you look at the explosion of EB5 visas from China, it's easy to see that even a country that's become enormously wealthy and powerful still is not a safe place for even the privileged. Sending a child or family member overseas to be able to pull them out is a norm for many of the elite there. In the meantime, the more the state controls, the fewer opportunities there will be for anyone...at some point, the State runs out of resources to steal and when it finally collapses, leaves an entire region decimated.
The Eastern Bloc was ruined due to Communism. Russia still hasn't been able to get to freedom. China, after starving millions in Mao's control, finally released the economy in Communism's best example yet, but still lags Taiwan and Japan. It's puppet North Korea hasn't done nearly as well. Vietnam's economy will have trouble scaling until the Communists are rolled back further, lagging Thailand significantly.
Neither form of government is good, but I'd venture to say fascism permanently scars a country's culture whereas communism smothers a culture slowly and completely.
All you need to do is speak to someone who grew up in a Communist country and you will find extreme anger at Communism.
Personally, I'm much more scared of Communism than I am of Fascism. Fascism needs an identifiable group of winners to be promoted, and a group of losers to whom all society's ills are blamed. It is disgusting, but inherently cannot spread beyond its core identifiable group, or it starts to moderate. Others not of this group will inherently not want this sort of thing to spread, and it will have many enemies. Hence, fascist regimes never survive for long. If a fascist regime takes hold, I'll know fairly quickly if I am a targeted group or not. If I'm targeted, I can flee. If I'm not targeted, then I can help. While long term stability is not going to happen, there's significant short term opportunism to keep things in play.
Communism, on the other hand, does the same thing, but not to a readily identifiable group. Hence, nobody is safe in a Communist country, and communist leaders have an unchecked view of what they want to do. When nobody is safe, helping others is a risk fewer are willing to take. The only way to stay ahead is corruption. If you look at the explosion of EB5 visas from China, it's easy to see that even a country that's become enormously wealthy and powerful still is not a safe place for even the privileged. Sending a child or family member overseas to be able to pull them out is a norm for many of the elite there. In the meantime, the more the state controls, the fewer opportunities there will be for anyone...at some point, the State runs out of resources to steal and when it finally collapses, leaves an entire region decimated.
The Eastern Bloc was ruined due to Communism. Russia still hasn't been able to get to freedom. China, after starving millions in Mao's control, finally released the economy in Communism's best example yet, but still lags Taiwan and Japan. It's puppet North Korea hasn't done nearly as well. Vietnam's economy will have trouble scaling until the Communists are rolled back further, lagging Thailand significantly.
Neither form of government is good, but I'd venture to say fascism permanently scars a country's culture whereas communism smothers a culture slowly and completely.
The Eastern Bloc was poorer than the West even before Communism. The exceptions were the Czech Republic (Bohemia) and East Germany. China was also incredibly poor prior to Communism and in fact it can be argued the country became Communist because of how inept Chiang Kai-Shek was in running the country. Vietnam lags behind Thailand because it was devastated by a horrific war that ended in the late 70s. North Korea was slightly ahead of South Korea until the Eastern Bloc collapsed and it began to double down on its autarky (none of the Communist states were truly autarkic). I am not saying Communism isn't a significant factor in impeding economic development but there are also important factors that played a role.
Fascist states got along with each other than the Communist states do.
For example, Franco's Spain got along well with Hitler's Germany and Mussolini's Italy. And Fascists didn't have a tendency to kill each other.
On the other hand, Communists have a tendency to kill each other. Stalin couldn't get along with Trotsky and murdered the latter in Mexico. Vietnam fought with the Khmer Rouge; Vietnam fought with China, China fought with USSR and the latter almost nuked China in 1969.
But when one of them got rid of Communism, they usually can along with each other very well. For example, Putin's Russia and China.
And when Fascist leaders met with each other, they just shook hands. But the way the Communist leaders greeted each other made me have goosebumps, i.e. Khrushchev and Mao, Brezhnev and Castro, they bear-hugged each other and cheek touched cheek.
I really suspect that all Communists are closeted gay.
Sometimes you have to choose the Lesser of Two Evils.
If the Soviet-backed Republican army beat the Fascist Franco in Spanish Civil War, what would have happened to Europe after WWII?
The feeble states like war-torn France and Netherlands would be sandwiched between two Communist powers -- USSR on the right side and Spain on the left side.
Moreover, it is easier for fascist states to rejuvenate into a liberal democracy peacefully, i.e. Franco's Spain and Pinochet's Chile. But Communist states had a much harder time.
China was also incredibly poor prior to Communism and in fact it can be argued the country became Communist because of how inept Chiang Kai-Shek was in running the country.
__________________________________________________ __
But under Chiang, there had never been large scale famine as compared to that happened in China between 1959-62 where an estimated 30 million people lost their lives due to starvation and other causes.
As you know very well, people living under communism were the most materialistic people in the world.
I do?
And how do I know it?
Oh wait - I used to live among these people)))) ; you - not so much, so then please do not tell me what "I know very well" - don't put words in my mouth proverbially so to speak.
NO, people living under communism were NOT the "most materialistic people in the world."
PART of them were, but that's not because they were "Soviet" - it was their nature to begin with, and they'd be greedy and materialistic no matter in WHAT system they'd live. It's just the nature of Russians - whenever they go for anything, they often don't have self-control or any limits. In case of "materialism" was the same story. I saw these people and I didn't even know how to talk to them - they were so awfully dumb.
But there were plenty of other, extremely non-materialistic people, as only Russians can be. (Russian culture in its core is very non-materialistic anyway, "communism" or not.)
Quote:
In fact, the "new man" or "homus sovieticus" is the most materialistic human that has existed on the face of the earth.
Yes, but as I've said - only part of them, and not the biggest part.
Quote:
And yes, of course, millions abroad from corruption. That money was used in reprivatization. People wanted money, to travel outside, to live like rich Russians live now....all that about "recognition of society"..sound like communist b.s.
Again - you clearly know NOT what you are talking about.
Throughout Soviet history the currency conversion/flow of currency abroad was regulated by Vneshtorgbank, so no money could leave the country "unattended," since the whole conversion was going through the strict procedure and through the government control ONLY.
It was Gorbachev that allowed the conversion, transfer and opening of the foreign accounts abroad to PRIVATE entities - i.e. so-called "business people" ( who in fact were either directly connected to government people or were plain governmental officials.) And that's when the crash of the Soviet economy and thuggery on a grand scale begun - in 1988/1989, and that's one of the reasons why Russians hate Gorbachev, while the West loves him.
Quote:
What has Crimea to do with the economic success of Russia? More with the economic success of the new Tzar.
The "economic success" of Russia became dependable on foreign ( read Western) investments directly - that was the whole design of the 90ies.
When Crimea was rightfully returned to Russia, the "economic sanctions" followed, so guess what started happening with those "foreign investments" and Russian economy?
Do you see? I'm not talking about Russians, but about the "new man" engendered by that system in all the communist world.
I know that Russians, as people, are very generous.
Soviet high officials obtained their funds from smuggling raw materials, diamonds, caviar, gold, strategic metals.....oil, and that dates to the beginning of communism. When Gorbachev appeared, there were already MANY Russian millionaires in many tax havens. And yes, the ones that deposited the money in those accounts were foreign companies, very large companies, etc. For example, many of those "moguls" governing former soviet republics in Asia were already very rich, in many cases they are still in power.
But foreign investments were always key in the development of Russia since the Tzars....the Tzars even imported Germans, Jews to achieve advancement. American companies always invested in the USSR. from oil to trucks.
As to corruption, some say that corruption went rampant after Stalin.
Do you see? I'm not talking about Russians, but about the "new man" engendered by that system in all the communist world.
I know that Russians, as people, are very generous.
I don't know about the "all communist world" - I can speak only for what I saw in the USSR, and the EARLY period of the USSR was all about "constructing a new man."
See, when you take bunch of uneducated idiots (and many of those whom revolution brought to power were indeed uneducated people from the bottom of the society) - they were coming up with a lot of warped ideas. So this "new man" was indeed constructed in the Soviet Union, however even the propaganda and rigidness of the Soviet system couldn't kill ALL the normalcy in people. So certain part of Russians was zombified, part remained normal - that's the best way I can put it.
Quote:
Soviet high officials obtained their funds from smuggling raw materials, diamonds, caviar, gold, strategic metals.....oil, and that dates to the beginning of communism.
During the "beginning of Communism" the borders were still open, so god knows what was going on at that point in time. Once the borders have been sealed and Stalin came to power - I assure you, ANY Soviet official going abroad would be scared to death to pull any of the stuff you are describing here.
Quote:
When Gorbachev appeared, there were already MANY Russian millionaires in many tax havens.
Absolutely not. The flight of capital/stashing money in foreign banks became possible ONLY after his "perestroyka" went into full swing. The rest is hear-say, the false rumors.
Quote:
And yes, the ones that deposited the money in those accounts were foreign companies, very large companies, etc. For example, many of those "moguls" governing former soviet republics in Asia were already very rich, in many cases they are still in power.
NO, it were Russians and people from other Soviet Republics. The Wall Street Journal was reporting back in 1991/1992, $ 13.5 billion that "Russian businessmen and businessmen from other Soviet Republics received in revenues and deposited on private accounts in foreign banks" All while Russian economy was going down the tube and people were starving. The question is - what were they exporting for $13,5 billion? Matryoshka dolls?
Quote:
But foreign investments were always key in the development of Russia since the Tzars...
*Sigh*
Yes, and this was one of the reasons why development of Russian economy was lagging behind. Tzarist Russia was in semi-colonial situation. And that was one of the bolshevik's first priorities - to set Russia free from this financial dependence.
.
Quote:
the Tzars even imported Germans, Jews to achieve advancement.
Tzars "imported Germans" - yes, but not Jews - Jews in Russia lived behind the Pale of Settlement and were not allowed to move into Russia proper, except for those people that converted, and only in small numbers. (Why do you think Jews overwhelmingly supported Communist Revolution in Russia?)
Quote:
American companies always invested in the USSR. from oil to trucks.
Again - no. Russia historically had German and French investments, but German in particular.
Americans showed up much later in time.
Quote:
As to corruption, some say that corruption went rampant after Stalin.
Yes, more or less.
That's one of the reasons that quality of goods was much higher during his time as well; private sector has been abolished only after his departure by the way - it was Khrushev that was fighting it tooth and nail, not Stalin.)
Strange as it might seem, the person that saved the Russian Revolution was Rockefeller, also Ford and GM. Russian trucks, for example, were built under licence by GM. Paradoxs in history. There are many books about the subject, there are even idiotic conspiranoic theories about the subject. I'm talking about the 20's and 30's...etc.
Americans also shipped enormous amounts of weapons during the war. Once I talked with a very cultured engineer from the USSR. I was amazed by the fact that he ignored the molotov-ribbentrop pact and US military aid. Maybe he knew, but they were being watched all the time.
You are right, the "new men" in communist countries were scum before and after communism.
I met a Russian Jewish industrialist that lived in Moscow before the revolution, and amazing as it might seem, he caught "the last train to Vladivostock" and ended in Shangai. Jews were rich and powerful in Tzarist Russia and... I know about ghettoes and progroms, but there were very powerful people too. Yes, there were many Jewish Bolsheviks, but that was used as baiting.
Lenin was always accused of being Jewish, but Ii read somewhere that he was something called Karmulk, just like Yul Brinner.
Strange as it might seem, "Fascist" Spain had very good economic relations with the USSR. They shipped enormous amounts of oil from Odessa to Alicante, Spain. The proceeds were used to ship goods to your internationalistic allies, including weapons. Part of the proceeds went to private accounts, and the deals with SOVIET EXPORT, etc, etc, were in no way different from deals with African and Latin American countries.
I remember a big scandal when somebody in some Comecom country opened a can of Russian meat and found caviar...I just remembered now. There was also a very big scandal with a "Soviet Bank", Norodny?
I guess that there was no corruption under Stalin.
I believe that the Caucasian mafia was also powerful under the USSR and that Odessa was some sort of free trade area, at that time, blackmarket generated billions...I guess somebody in goverment was behind and received a cut. Just speculating.
Last edited by karstic; 05-09-2017 at 03:23 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
; you - not so much, so then please do not tell me what "I know very well" - don't put words in my mouth proverbially so to speak. 
