The History Thread
This is a place where anyone can come and ask a question or start a discussion about any historical event or time period, or anything related to history (whether it be a book or film or documentary).
I'll get the ball rolling with a question about the Soviet Union. We've started looking at the Cold War in my history class at school, but something we haven't touched on is the actual way people lived in Russia and the other Soviet countries after WW2. Is there anyone who's studied or lived in the Soviet Union who can tell me what the quality of life was?
Sign in to comment in this discussion.
Comments
Thanks for getting back to me so quickly. I do have a few questions though:
Have your family members ever said anything about America? What were some of the things that were told to people about the United States?
What is the general opinion of communism now in Russia? I've heard that there are a fairly large group of people who regret the Soviet Union falling.
If your parents or grandparents are okay to talk about it and remember it, were the Russian people aware of what was happening during the Cuban Missile Crisis? I know that a lot of Americans believed that a nuclear war was about to start. Was there a similar fear in the Soviet Union?
Overall, what do you parents and grandparents think of life in the Soviet Union compared to Russia today? Are there specific aspects of life now that are better or worse?
Again, thanks for getting back to me so quickly. It's always been a mystery to me as to what life was like in the Soviet Union as I've heard people say positive and negative things about it.
This thread just started and it already has more history than the History Channel.
It already has more history than my history class.
I took a class about the history of the USSR, (particularly the de-sovietization toward the end). The Soviet Union wasn't the Orwellian, totalitarian hell that we're sometimes taught, but it was far from utopia.
An important caveat to all of the following Is that the standard of living varied greatly in the sticks vs. in urbanized areas like Leningrad. It's also worth noting that life immediately following WWII was extremely hard. Most of Russia west of the Urals was a smoldering ruin and production was on a war footing, which caused a lot of strife.
Generally, Soviets did a lot of the same things we did.. They worked for a wage, went to school, pursued hobbies with their spare time. Instead of the American dream, they had the Soviet dream of a car and dacha (vacation home in the country). The Soviet apartment blocks were pretty shitty, but were usually a significant improvement from previous living arrangements (amusingly, if you look at the building trends of 60's New York, we had our dull, gray apartment buildings too, where we stuffed the poor people), State distribution of goods Proved a rather shoddy substitute for markets and shortages were pretty common, but nothing like the great famines of the 20's and 30's. Healthcare and education were completely free, though they varied quite a bit in quality from place to place.
Political terror eased significantly after Stalin's death, but it definitely didn't disappear. Citizens were spied on by the KGB, the unbelievably brutal gulag system stayed open for quite a few years and people with the wrong views could find themselves in the insane asylum. Ironically, labor struggle was harshly repressed, but workers occasionally launched wildcat strikes anyway. People weren't free to move around the country or leave unless they were considered trustworthy Still, the idea that Soviet citizens had no agency whatsoever isn't grounded in fact. Even at the height of the Stalinist terror, the state didn't micromanage every aspect of their lives or anything. People in the "anti-revisionist" states like Romania and Albania had it much worse.
Ironically, Soviet media wasn't that hostile to America. We were usually treated as merely ignorant rather than diabolical villains. The Soviet cinema usually turned to the Nazis if they needed a legit villain.
tl:dr: People lived as normally as they could, given the circumstances. The consensus I've heard among expats is that life was more secure, but also more austere and authoritarian.
Edit: I forgot to add, part of the reason some Russians are so nostalgic for the Soviet times is that Russia's transition to neoliberal capitalism was extremely painful. The price of good skyrocketed while wages and pensions stayed the same. Life expectancy took a nosedive and the state infrastructure was pawned off to influential members of the Communist Party at sweetheart prices.
Is anyone else interested in the baroque, Renaissance era? Or even middle ages?
I Love history! I really love to talk about things such as WW 2, WW1, Korean War,Vietnam War, Cold War, Medieval Times, Revolutionary War and the civil war!
Who the hell is into Civil War history, other than old white guys?
I'm totally following this thread.
Question: In different countries, history is taught differently. Is it possible to make a true image of world history taking into account all the different versions?
[removed]
I've heard people saying that Hitler shot himself, that he poisoned himself and that he didn't die at all. What the hell is the correct one?
It's an auspicious day for a thread involving Civil Wars and life under Socialism. Today marks the 81st anniversary of a botched coup attempt that started the Spanish Civil War, an event that's pretty near and dear to a man of my political leanings.. Elements of the Spanish Army and Civil Guard rose up in cities throughout Spain in an attempt to overthrow the new Republican government and restore monarchy. The country's big trade unions organized civilian militias, scrounged up any guns and dynamite they could find and helped the Army stop the coup in about half of Spain.
Since the government was in chaos, the Anarchist CNT-FAI effectively controlled most of northern Spain for a year. The workers seized their farms and factories and things went pretty well for a while. George Orwell fought in one of the militias around this time and wrote a book about it called Homage to Catalonia. Unfortunately, the Soviets and Spanish Communist Party weren't down with the whole "no gods, no masters" thing and captured Catalonia the year after and made the workers give everything back to the bourgeoisie. Orwell has the flee Spain after the NKVD started disappearing his buddies. The smear campaign and terror his militia faced was part of the inspiration behind 1984 and Animal Farm.
Here's a free ebook version of Homage to Catalonia, if anyone is interested.
Are you referring to the months around the time the Soviet Union was dissolved, or was the transition something that happened over a number of years?
Also, what do you mean by neoliberal capitalism?
I believe that both Hitler and his mistress Eva Braun took cyanide pills before Hitler shot them both.
Waste of good cyanide pills if you ask me. Lol jk I kid. But really, there was no point.
I'm guessing Hitler didn't want to be even the smallest of chances of surviving and being captured. In the event that either the pills or the bullet failed, Hitler probably didn't want to give the Allies the satisfaction of having him as a prisoner.
Pretty similar to the situation Yugoslavia was in. Religious freedom was almost nonexistent.
If they succeeded in long term in Spain, who knows what the world will be made of today. It is sad anarchy is so much forgotten. For my tiny knowledge of anarchism, it seems that the biggest weakness of anarchy is that their neighbors (and also oligarcs) don't want that to happen, even if it's not in their country.
Would love to live in such society if this ever happens again though.
Also communism was oddly one of the strongest ennemy of anarchy; they did the same with Makhno, didn't they?
I'm of the same opinion. Catalonia from July 36 to about March 37 was truly a glimpse at what the early stages of Socialism could be like. Reading about it is both inspiring and terribly sad.
The Communists, as always, had a hand in crushing the Anarchists. more specifically the Communist press. Stalin decided that Spain would be more useful to Russia as a bourgeois democracy than as a revolutionary worker state, so that's the line the Communist Parties took, an anti-working class line.. The communist press disgraced the militias, first by accusing them of being an unruly mob and then by accusing them of being "secret fascists". It's absurd in hindsight, but people ate it up. Ironically the "disciplined" and "brilliant" Republican Army troops were later killed in the thousands in horrible, pointless battles waged by their commanders.
Of course, the revolution had it's own problems. Some businesses were left in private hands, the bourgeoisie were just driven underground rather than truly suppressed or enticed to join the workers. Plus the militias were mostly denied guns and proper training, which caused them horrible casualties.
But yeah, the commies definitely didn't help. They basically did the same thing to Makhno, except it was much more blatant.
There were dead hitler body doubles as well so maybe he didn't die at all, I dont think the way he died matters in the end.
Neoliberalism is an ideology that focused on encouraging economic growth through global trade, union busting, reducing "entitlement" spending and taking a more laissez-faire approach to the economy in general
The transition started in the late 80's with Gorbachev, but really took off right after the USSR fell, with Yeltsin's so-called "shock treatment". Soviet central-planning was dismantled and replaced with decentralized markets, subsidies were cut to unprofitable businesses like farms, government infrastructure (such as factories and oil refineries) were given to politically connected people who became a new class of oligarchs. The Ruble was restructured (how so is a bit beyond me) and it inflated as a result. A government pension that could let you live comfortably in the 80's could barely cover a few rides on the metro by the mid nineties. Bread remained subsidized, but only because people might have revolted if it wasn't.
This was expected to raise the GDP and increase standards of living, but ended up halving the GDP and plunging the Russian people (especially the old and rural folks) into a state of absolute misery. The economy only really got back on track under Putin, which is partly why Russians like him so much.
I have a document on my computer that I literally just finished today that is a list of every single war, violent protest, riot that resulted in at least 10 deaths, and bloody coups that I was able to get enough information about listed in chronological order with the start date, end date, victorious faction, estimated death toll, and my failing attempt (because it's literally impossible) to keep a "Total Dead" count, which is the number of people that had died during every war. The document isn't really "finished" because I want to keep it updated, meaning I'll add stuff at the end of every month. The document is currently 493 KB which is monstrous considering it is laid out like:
Name of War, Start State - End Date Estimated Killed ( "Total" Dead) Victorious Faction (Sometimes, "Draw)
It has taken me so long to make, because I actually like to read about and learn about the war when it comes to adding it. This isn't some assignment a teacher gave me, nor something I ever plan on publishing for whatever reason, it is just kind of a hobby I got into. War interests me, as you can probably tell.
You can look at the fruits of my labor here
If you're interested, you can take a view through that, find one that interests you and go learn some things. If you notice where I fucked up somewhere, I will happily look into it. If you are aware of something I missed, again, I'll look into it. It is a little hard to read because of how bunched up everything is, and I included the Kurukshetra War and the Trojan War when I really probably shouldn't have.
[removed]
That's pretty fuckin' neat man! Of course, whichever faction won, it was always the regular folks who lost.
Recently, I've been forced to call a lot of my assumptions about World War II and whether it was a "good war" into question. The fascists carried out unimaginable acts of barbarism, to be sure. At the same time, the democratic allies and Soviet Union carried out their own campaigns of terror that had much more to do with shaping the post-war world (and preventing the wave of revolutions that ended WWI) than crushing fascism.
The Myth of the Great Patriotic War in Russia. WW2 started when Nazi Germany invaded Poland to recapture lands that had been taken from them after WW1...oh and more besides...2 weeks later the Soviet Union Invaded Eastern Poland in accordance to a deal made with Hitler. Stalin enabled Hitler and helped bring about WW2. So in my honest Opinion...they are just as bad as the Nazis.
Are the Brits and French as bad as the Nazis too? Because they collaborated with Nazi Germany from the beginning.
They allowed Hitler to walk into the Rhineland and re-militarize it, which they never would've done while Germany was under Weimar control.
They gave Hitler the Sudetenland on a silver platter, while threatening the Czechs with destruction if they didn't agree. Soviet offers to form an a broad anti-fascist front and to provide military support to the Czechs were ignored and rebuffed. When Germany moved to annex the rest of Czechaslovakia, the English government responded by saying "tut tut wot a shame" and freezing Czech assets.
They failed to support and actually hindered the anti-fascist war effort in Spain, while Germany and Italy were allowed to bomb Spanish villages and arm Franco while sitting on England's "non-intervention committee". The Soviets and Mexicans were the only foreign powers to stand against the Fascists (though, as I posted before, the Soviets had selfish reasons for intervening).
Their declaration of war, after Germany invaded Poland was a total farce. French troops sat at the border despite having 100+ divisions to the Germans' < 30. During the Nuremburg trials, the Nazi leaders confirm that if France had committed to an attack on Germany, it would've been a very short war. They were counting on France and Germany doing nothing to stop them and it paid off. France made a pathetic little stab in the Saarland and lied to the Polish government, telling them that French troops were pouring over the border.
England and France thought they could manipulate Nazi Germany to be their bulwark against Bolshevism, right up until the Germans occupied Norway. Likewise, Stalin thought he could manipulate Germany into being his bulwark against western liberalism, right up until Operation Barbarossa. The difference is that the USSR at least tried to come to some kind of accord with France and England at first, whereas they intended to steer German aggression toward the Communists from the very start. Their collaboration was less direct than that of the Soviets, and didn't involve atrocities like Katyn, but it definitely was a greater factor in the start of WWII than the Molotov-Ribbentop Pact. They refused to check German expansion at a time when doing so would've almost certainly led to Hitler being ousted by the Prussian aristocrats.
I liked studying World War II, but since its been brought up I'll go to the next war that really interested me:
GOOOOOOOOOD MORNING VIETNAAAAAAM!
Absolutely terrible war, but I always got a little excited when we got to this in class because it was just so intriguing to me. Vietnam music is one of my favorite subgenres of music, and I like hearing the stories and such too. Who else feels the same?
Thanks, man!
How dare you putting France's military strategy in question?
Défense is the only true strategy. Maginot line is unbreakable!
... Oh wait.
Vietnam is a really interesting war because its a war commonly taught abut in the U.S. where we (America) was the "bad" guy. I had two Uncles to serve during the war, one in the Air Force and the other in the Navy. Both are dead now, and I didn't hear any stories from them, but at my High School we did something pretty cool for Veteran's Day every year. They'd assemble all of the kids in the school to the, what we called the "Little Theatre," and a bunch of veterans that were invited would talk to us, many of them veterans of the Vietnam War. A pastor at a local church told some of the best stories I ever heard, my personal favorite being this one (paraphrased, of course):
"I remember the first time they sent me into a spider hole (Vietcong Tunnel). They tied a rope to me, and down I went. I went a good ways down, and I started yanking on that rope and hollering, "GET ME OUT OF HERE, FOR THE LOVE OF GOD!!!" They yanked me out, I whiped my head and said "Thanks fellahs, I saw a spider!" My sergeant came over, "THAT'S WHY THAT CALL IT A 'SPIDER-HOLE!" and kicked me back down."
Tfw you forget Belgium exists.
No I just put France and the UK down to being too naïve to think that someone would risk another great war in Europe.
We won the battles....but lost the war. A war that should not have involved us...damn French. Did not help that the South Vietnam leadership needed killing worse than the North's.
Hahahaha, awesome story!
Yeah, my teachers were completely honest with me about The Vietnam War and how my country were the bad guys.
The horrible photos released to the public are only a fraction of the terrors those battles held.
Naïve? When you go through something like ww1 and its horrors it's not about being simply naive.
I can only talk about France but if we failed to react it's because of the total idiocy of our commandement. They believed in another war of tranchées, trusted the maginot line..
Aye, so nice to meet more Russian people here
Sorry to intervene in your discussion, but I would like to answer at least some of these questions as I'm from Russia too.
Yes, plenty of people regert the Soviet Union falling. But not because they are fans of communism - as you might know, the falling was extremely painful for our country so most people just regret the way it went and wish it could've been different. Some of them wouldn't mind Soviet Union still existing although not in the same form as it used to be, maybe something like a simple socialistic country with softer ideology. Capitalism didn't work out well honestly in Russia so you can find some disappointment in people.
However, communism is certainly not popular among masses, We do have a communistic party but it's obviously far from classic communism and is supported mainly by 70 year old people who have nostalgia about living in USSR. People of middle age, whose youth happened while the falling, tend to have right political views. While the lefts are usually the younger generation. Socialism is quite popular as an idea among scholars, but only anti-autoritarian. For example, I'm a social democrat (although political coordinates test told me that I'm leaning towards anarchism and I'm genuinely interested in it). During 2000s Russia actually had a lot of freedom so kids like me who grew up in these time have a strong sense of democracy. I'm quite worried for the upcoming generation though, which will be taught more conservative ideas.
Believe it or not, bit the falling of USSR has also rose a pretty big amount of monarchists who root for traditional slogan of Russian Empire - "orthodoxy, autocracy and nationality". There are definitely more nationalists now than before, people turn back to past to analyse Russian history and identification. While in some way it's good because during the falling our history was strongly manipulated and for some time our country humiliated the idea of loving your nation, Russian history was strongly manipulated and we generally lost our dignity. But modern radical monarchists are a little obsessed with all the Russian stuff and patriotism. Thank God they're certainly in minority and their ideas aren't popular.
Well, of course there's more freedom now. People are generally more rich, it's easier to improve the quality of your life, you can travel, study wherever you want, afford more different things. Also religion isn't opressed anymore which is important for many Russians. But what a lot of people miss is that communistic collective spirit. People were much more friendly, relied on each other more. Education was way better than now. Money and class division were less of a problem, even if USSR had an elite, it didn't show off. Children were always taken care of by the government, it was easier to work, streets were safer. And yeah, optimism was everywhere. The falling of USSR caused a huge increase of criminality and quick enrichment of unworthy men. 90s and the transition of democracy was quite unpleasant, that's why in contrast of this many people have nostalgia about living in USSR.
I can't tell how many of them would truly want communism back. On the other hand, capitalistic model and consumer society kinda failed in Russia so our country stands on the crossroads. The government is struggling to find a fitting national idea to make people believe in it, something like a third way. Putin leans on patriotism but I'm not sure if it's truly gonna work. He's been controlling the situation for almost 20 years already but he can't live forever. The critical point is closer and closer and one day Putin will die so different people will come. Some great changes are ahead of Russia, I sense it.
I fairly tried not to be biased in my answers. I have to admit that if it comes to monarhcism vs communism, I'd defend the latter in a heartbeat.
EDIT: oops, i meant questions 2 and 4
EDIT 2: fixed minor mistakes and added some more of my opinion
Well yeah it is easy to say that in hindsite....but no one had thought about massive quick strikes with tanks and aircraft the likes that Germany pulled off. Plus the line was not even complete because of a lack of willingness to invest all that money in it, because surely there would not be another war like they had all just suffered through.
And it was not like France had not invested in tanks...but the use of them was tied into a strategy that was strait out of the great war. Also The Brits had begun to modernize their military...the Hurricane and the Spitfire became the start of a line of aircraft developments that would tear the heart out of the Luftwaffe.
So yeah it is easy to armchair quarterback decisions...but without historical perspective you are led to think everyone in charge were complete morons...or that the people at the time would willingly keep paying the crushing taxes to build a massive military.
So yeah...the Maginot line was a misguided boondoggle...in hindsite...but in context of the time? It was perfect for the war everyone thought they would have to fight.