Khrushchev's reforms of education and social policy. Khrushchev's reforms

After the death of Stalin, the new leadership of the USSR in the person of Khrushchev faced the need to reform the country in the field of Agriculture and industry, above all, since these industries were vital and gained momentum after the end of the war. In this article, we will evaluate Khrushchev's economic management reform and show its positive and negative aspects.

Economic program of Malenkov

In 1953, Georgy Maksimovich Malenkov, who served as chairman of the Council of Ministers, for the first time said that the country needed economic reforms. In his presentation, it was necessary to focus on agriculture and light industry. The reform of the industry was supposed to lead to the fact that within 3 years the country had to provide all citizens with essential goods.

Changes in agriculture included improvements in land cultivation technologies to increase crop yields, as well as a reduction in taxes paid by peasants for the right to use land. The proposals were enthusiastically received by the people, but Malenkov was very quickly removed from his post, and Khrushchev undertook the reform of economic management. And it turned out to be extremely controversial.

Reforming agriculture under Khrushchev

Agriculture is a key aspect of both Khrushchev's reforms and Malinkov's ideas. But you need to understand that there was a huge difference between them. Contemporaries call Malinkov's program intensive, and Khrushchev - extensive.

The intensive path of development of agriculture meant to achieve an increase in the yield of current fertile soils. An extensive development path based on the constant expansion of cultivated land. With the victory of Khrushchev in the USSR, the implementation of an extensive plan began, but by 1965 it became obvious that this experiment had failed, and agriculture was in terrible decline.

History reference

Malenkov talked about quality, and Khrushchev about quantity. And if locally the quality gave certain results, then at the stage of 10 years a failure followed. To understand the essence, I will cite the first five-year plans under the leadership of Stalin. First, they built enterprises (quantitative approach), then they began to attract qualified personnel and improve the knowledge of workers (qualitative approach). Exactly the same process should have taken place in agriculture - first, the expansion of land (quantitative approach), and then the creation of technologies for its processing and growing crops (qualitative approach). But the reform of economic management in general and agriculture in particular missed the second stage. Therefore, Stalin's five-year plans gave a positive result, and Khrushchev's reforms - a negative one. But the time interval is identical ...

Major reforms in 1953-1958:

• In 1954, the foundation of the virgin lands begins. In total, 42 million hectares of new land were developed.
• Tax cuts for collective farms, as well as the cancellation of previous debts.
• Reduced farm taxes
• It is allowed to increase the subsidiary farm by 5 times
• Collective farms are equipped with the machinery and tools necessary for their work.

Development of virgin lands

Khrushchev's economic reform in agriculture largely began with the development of virgin lands, which began in 1954. New lands for development were chosen in Kazakhstan and Western Siberia. Initially this is not the best place for agriculture, but nevertheless, due to the fact that more than 150 thousand people were involved in the work, it was already possible in 1958 to develop 42 million hectares of new land. Among the people who were involved in the work were party officials, specialists, prisoners.

An interesting fact is that Brezhnev was supposed to lead the development of virgin lands. Why exactly him? Leonid Ilyich was a longtime friend of Khrushchev, who in every possible way promoted his friend to leading roles.

History reference

To understand the essence of the development of virgin lands, I propose to pay attention to the table, which indicates the gross grain harvest in the USSR.

What does it say? Even a cursory glance at these numbers shows that Khrushchev's extensive path was extremely inefficient, and here's why:

• The development of virgin lands began in 1953/4. Therefore, the sharp increase in the harvested grain in these areas by almost 25,000 thousand tons is understandable. At the same time, the total harvest of grain in the USSR increased by 30,000 thousand tons. That is, there was a positive dynamic for the whole country.
• The period from 159 to 1963 showed an increase in the grain harvest in the virgin regions by almost 6,000 tons, while the growth in the country as a whole was just over 14,000 thousand tons. That is, the proportion broke and the virgin lands were ineffective. This was the main mistake of Khrushchev's economic reform in agriculture - it was necessary not to pay more attention to the quality of existing lands, and not to focus on new arable land in Siberia and Kazakhstan, which could not be compared in quality with the black soil of the southern regions.

Administrative decisions in collective farms (villages)

One of the main measures to support collective farms in initial stage steel reforms: canceling previous debts and raising purchase prices. Now the state has guaranteed higher prices for the purchase of agricultural products.

A big step forward was the permission for peasants to have subsidiary plots. Let me remind you that before the Khrushchev era, subsidiary farms could exist, but only very small ones, and a tax had to be paid for their presence.

This, combined with the development of new lands, led to an unprecedented increase in agricultural production, which increased by 34% between 1953 and 1958. It was a big leap in development, which could only be compared with the early stages of the NEP.

Amazing Fact, but both dubious reforms (NEP and Khrushchev's reforms) gave in the short term an unprecedented growth in agriculture. But in the medium term (10 years), both of these policies led to dire consequences - a head.

History reference

Administrative methods of influence were put at the forefront at the beginning of agricultural reforms. This led to the following results just a few years after the start of the reform:

• The growth of the welfare of the peasants. The result is good, but the Central Committee of the party revealed dissatisfaction that “kulaks” might reappear in the village.
• The economic growth villages minimized the need for administrative influence.

As a result, already since 1959, the reform of agricultural management has changed its essence - now not persecuted economic indicators efficiency, but only administrative pressure from above to force the peasants to do what was considered right in the party.

Failure of agricultural reform

Until 1959, the reform in agriculture was going well, without any exaggeration. But what Khrushchev arranged after that is incomprehensible to the mind, and is the clearest example of how the incompetence of the leadership, as well as the desire to control all people, can ruin any positive undertakings.

The seven-year plan for the development of agriculture (1959-1965) began with the reorganization of the MTS (machine and tractor stations). More precisely, MTS was simply closed, and the equipment was offered to be redeemed by collective farms. In fact, the ransom was mandatory, since the equipment was necessary for cultivating the land. But the state overestimated the price and demanded full payment within 1 year. This was the first blow to the finances of collective farms.

The next blow was dealt to private farms. If in the previous 5 years it was allowed to increase it 5 times, but since the beginning of the 1960s, part-time farming has become practically illegal. He was again returned to the old framework. The administration of economic reforms under Khrushchev said that the peasants should work for the collective farms, and not in their own fields. As a result, officials received an order to buy out all the cattle that are in private farms within 3 years.

In addition to these steps, the leadership of the USSR took other steps:

• Creation of large agricultural holdings. Collective farms were united and enlarged.
• Increase in prices for meat (by 30%), for butter (by 25%).
• Increase in sown area of ​​corn.

If you ask what people know about the Khrushchev era, most will say - they planted corn. And they will be right. Where the Secretary of the Central Committee got this mania is not clear. But it is clear to another - the increase in sown areas of corn was artificial was carried out by reducing the sown areas of wheat and rye. As a result, the deepest crisis of agriculture occurred in the USSR. For the first time in many years, grain began to be purchased abroad! As a result, the economic management reform undertaken by Khrushchev in agriculture failed.

Development of industry under Khrushchev

One of the most important problems in the development of industry in the Khrushchev era was that by the end of 1959, the share of production of objects of group "A" (means of production) was 75%. On the one hand, this emphasizes the country's focus on the development of industry (in 1953, for example, this figure was 70%), but on the other hand, it was very dangerous. The danger is that the share of enterprises in Group B (personal consumption items) practically did not work.

In the post-war era of Stalin, the annual rate of industrial growth exceeded 10%. Khrushchev and his team believed that it was realistic to keep these numbers, it was only necessary to build new enterprises. This was done everywhere - they opened new factories and plants, although they publicly said that they would develop the economy thanks to scientific and technological progress. But this progress was applied only in the military sphere.

Reforming the management of the national economy

The reform of economic management in industry undertaken by Khrushchev also affected management. In 1957, the ministries were abolished, and their place was taken by the regional sectoral ministries. Today they are known as Sovnarhozy (Councils of the National Economy). As a result, there was a partial decentralization of the economy, with the transfer of powers to the regions. There were some positives, but the negatives outweighed:

• Links between regions of the country and sectors of the economy are broken
• The technical concept of production is violated
• The reform had no potential for growth
• Enterprises did not have economic freedom.

These problems became quickly apparent to the leadership of the USSR, and Khrushchev's economic reform moved to the next stage of smoothing out the negative consequences. In particular, the Economic Councils moved from the regional to the republican level (in fact, they returned to the ministries). After that, a plan was announced for 1959-1965 for a qualitative leap in the economy.

Industry Growth Rate

The key indicator of economic development is the rate of industrial growth. And this indicator was inexorable for Khrushchev's leadership - the pace fell, and quite quickly. Below is a table, after reviewing which you yourself will evaluate the reform of economic management undertaken by Khrushchev in terms of industry and agriculture.

Table - economic growth rates.

The growth rate of industry declined regularly, and in the period 1961-1916, both industry and agriculture literally failed. It became obvious that the economic management reform had also failed in terms of industry, although in general an industrial society in the USSR had already been formed.

Social policy under Khrushchev

Economic policy Khrushchev emphasized social policy. But failures in agriculture led, among other things, to uprisings. The most widespread of these was the uprising in Novocherkassk in 1962, for which the army and tanks were used to suppress. But in general, during this period, several important changes were made at once:

• Collective farmers were given passports. Let me remind you that until 1960, people in the countryside did not have passports!
• In 1964, a pension was established for collective farmers. Before that, it didn't exist!
• Collective farmers were guaranteed wages, which became fixed.
• Salary increase by 19%
• Reducing the working day to 46 hours (in production).
• The growth of housing (everyone knows apartments with the name "Khrushchev"). During this period, 54 million people received new apartments.

Khrushchev's economic policy had its positive moments, but globally for the country this time was a time of great failure. The industry worked, but it became obvious that the enterprises of group "B" were categorically lacking. In agriculture, they experimented to the point that for the first time since the civil war, grain began to be purchased abroad. The increase in prices led to numerous uprisings (it is clear that they are not particularly talked about, but they were). Therefore, Khrushchev's activity is more negative for the USSR than positive. It was from here that the processes that resulted in perestroika began. And the worst thing is that Khrushchev handed over power to his like-minded and student - Brezhnev, who continued with pleasure. In fairness, it should be noted that here the student significantly surpassed the teacher.

I believe that we have made a full assessment of the management of the economy, undertaken by Khrushchev during his reign.

Malenkov's reforms

Malenkov consistently pursued a line to remove the party from power. In 1942 the institution of military commissars was liquidated . In August 1944 By decision of the Politburo, the positions of branch secretaries - regional committees, regional committees, the Central Committee of the Communist Parties of the Union republics were abolished. In 1944 Malenkov prepared a draft decision on combining the positions of the first secretaries of the CPSU and the Chairmen of the Executive Committees. The first secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the union republic, the regional committee, regional committee, district committee, city committee, district committee of the party was to become simultaneously the chairman of the council of people's committees of the union (autonomous) republic, the executive committee of the regional, regional, district, city, district Soviet of Workers' Deputies. Stalin supported the project. But January 26, 1944. instead of the plenum, a meeting of the Politburo was held, at which the draft of this resolution was not only categorically rejected, but also deleted altogether from the agenda of the plenum . May 1953 year, the main privilege of partocrats, envelopes, was abolished. On the initiative of Malenkov, a government decree was adopted to revise the norms of monetary remuneration for party and economic officials. According to the new rules, party officials were supposed to receive less business executives, while both of them lost part of their income, especially those that were issued in the notorious "envelopes". Of course, this aroused the indignation of the apparatchiks. Malenkov swung at the "holy of holies" - at the privileges of party officials. And then they could not forgive this Malenkov.

As chairman of the Council of Ministers, in May 1953, Malenkov canceled the “envelopes” officially introduced by the Council of Ministers even before the war to the entire party apparatus, that is, cash bonuses to the first, second, third and other numbered secretaries, heads of departments, and so on, from the Central Committee of the CPSU to district committee of the party. In addition to the basic one, these people received at least three more tax-free salaries. Plus a “turntable”, a Kremlin telephone, a Kremlin clinic, a Kremlin canteen, a Kremlin sanatorium, etc. And all this was taken away. Moreover, the salary of all workers of the Soviet apparatus was immediately added. If before the first secretary of the regional committee received four to five times more than the chairman of the regional executive committee, now the chairman of the regional executive committee turned out to be better off. Before the September 1953 Plenum, Khrushchev, from the Central Committee's cash desk, since he controlled the party's funds, paid its functionaries everything that Malenkov "underpaid". So Khrushchev enlisted the support of the party nomenklatura by returning the envelopes to them. Out of gratitude, at the suggestion of Malenkov, they unanimously elected Khrushchev as their first secretary. In September 1953 It was Khrushchev who at the plenum of the Central Committee announced the reform of agriculture. On September 3, 1953, at the plenum of the Central Committee, the post of the First (with a CAPITAL letter - S.M.) Secretary of the Central Committee was approved. At the same plenum, at the suggestion of Malenkov, Khrushchev was elected First Secretary of the Central Committee of the CPSU. Malenkov went further. On January 25, 1954, the Presidium of the Central Committee adopted a resolution on serious shortcomings in the work of the party and state apparatus. This resolution significantly reduced the staff of the central apparatus of ministries and departments, which automatically increased the rights of the Central Committee and Council of Ministers of the republics.

63 Liberalization of society and economy during the years of the "thaw" (1953-1964).

Thaw is an unofficial designation of the period in the history of the USSR after the death of I.V. Stalin (mid-1950s - early 1960s [source?]). It was characterized in the internal political life of the USSR by some liberalization of the regime, the weakening of totalitarian power, the emergence of some freedom of speech, the relative democratization of political and public life, openness Western world more creative freedom.

Economic reforms of N. Khrushchev

Having achieved relative political stability with the help of a course towards some liberalization of the regime, Khrushchev faced intractable economic problems. It was decided to start reforms with agriculture. It was supposed to raise state purchase prices for the products of collective farms, to expand the area under crops at the expense of virgin and fallow lands. The development of virgin lands at first gave an increase in food. On the other hand, it was carried out to the detriment not only of traditional grain regions, but was not scientifically prepared. Therefore, soon the virgin lands fell into decay. From March 1955 began reforming agricultural planning. The goal was proclaimed to be a combination of centralized management of agriculture with the expansion of rights and economic initiative at the local level, i.e., the decentralization of government in the republics. Almost 15 thousand enterprises were transferred to the jurisdiction of the republican administrative bodies. In 1957, the government began to abolish the sectoral ministries and replace them with territorial government bodies. National economy). The SNKh of the USSR, the Supreme Economic Council of the USSR became the central apparatus for managing the national economy. In the end 1962. one of the most unsuccessful reforms was carried out: party organizations were divided into industrial and rural.

Economic measures of N.S. Khrushchev.

Having achieved relative political stability with the help of a course towards some liberalization of the regime, Khrushchev faced intractable economic problems. It was decided to start reforms with agriculture. It was supposed to raise state purchase prices for the products of collective farms, to expand the area under crops at the expense of virgin and fallow lands. The development of virgin lands at first gave an increase in food. On the other hand, it was carried out to the detriment not only of traditional grain regions, but was not scientifically prepared. Therefore) "Virgin lands soon fell into decay. In March 1955, the reform of agricultural production planning began. The goal was proclaimed to be a combination of centralized management of agriculture with the expansion of rights and local economic initiative, that is, the decentralization of the administration of the republics. Almost 15 thousand enterprises were In 1957, the government began to abolish the sectoral ministries and replace them with territorial government bodies, The SNKh (Councils of the National Economy) were created in the republics. One of the most unsuccessful reforms was carried out: party organizations were divided into industrial and rural ones.

In the development of industry, much attention was paid to the development of light industry, the result was an increase in gross output. Food Industry 1.5 times. A significant place in Khrushchev's overall strategy was assigned to scientific and technological progress in the development of heavy and light industry.

Serious shortcomings of economic reforms were managerial miscalculations, an increase in military spending, politicization and ideologization in the management of the national economy. Such experiments as the so-called "Ryazan meat experiment", "corn epic", the eviction of agricultural scientists from Moscow to the villages, etc. are widely known. in 1958). In order to reduce tension, the authorities went to increase salaries in the public sector, doubling the size of pensions, lowering the retirement age, and reducing the length of the working day. The crisis in the system of government was evident, but Khrushchev laid all the blame on the rural party organizations. The situation was aggravated by the significant growth of the bureaucratic apparatus, confusion! functions, duplication of decisions, etc. The reform of the central administration of the national economy (the creation of economic councils) had the same consequences.

Thus, Khrushchev's economic and political reforms were both limited and democratized. were reduced to a formal structural reorganization, which inevitably led to crisis phenomena. The crisis of reforms led to the emergence of conservative tendencies and the restoration of some elements of totalitarianism. Khrushchev's line on the sole rule of the party and state apparatus was regarded by the party and state apparatus as a desire for a new dictatorship. As a result, in October 1964, at the Plenum of the Central Committee, Khrushchev was removed from his posts in the party and government.

XX Congress of the CPSU and its consequences.

There were 1,349 voting delegates and 81 deliberative delegates representing 6,795,896 party members and 419,609 candidate party members.

The congress was attended by delegations of communist and workers' parties from 55 foreign countries.

Order of the day:

Report of the Central Committee of the CPSU. Speaker - N. S. Khrushchev.

Report of the Central Audit Commission of the CPSU. Speaker - P. G. Moskatov.

Directives on the 6th five-year plan for the development of the national economy of the USSR for 1956-1960. Speaker N. A. Bulganin.

Elections of the central bodies of the party. Speaker - N. S. Khrushchev.

Before Khrushchev's report "On the cult of personality and its consequences", the Congress delegates were given a "Letter to the Congress" by V.I. Lenin. Many, of course, knew about its existence, but until that moment it had not been published. The specific consequences of the fact that the party did not implement Lenin's recommendations, primarily in relation to Stalin, were carefully concealed and disguised. In Khrushchev's report, these consequences were made public for the first time and received a corresponding political assessment. The report, in particular, said: "Now we are talking about a question of great importance both for the present and for the future of the party - it is about how the cult of Stalin's personality is gradually taking shape, which at a certain stage turned into a source of a number of major and very serious perversions of party principles, party democracy, revolutionary legality. In this regard, Khrushchev criticizes the Stalinist regime, speaking of violations and departure from the Leninist principles of party discipline and party leadership, which he sees as the reason for the development of Stalin's personality cult. The substantiation of the exposure of the cult of personality by Lenin's principles is the first distinguishing feature of N.S. Khrushchev's report.

Of particular importance was the exposure of the Stalinist formula "enemies of the people." Khrushchev openly raised before the delegates the question of the illegality and inadmissibility of repressive reprisals against ideological opponents, and although the report mainly gives an old (according to the "Short Course in the History of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks") assessment of the ideological and political struggle in the party and the role in it Stalin, it was undoubtedly a bold step and the merit of Khrushchev. The report said: “It is noteworthy that even in the midst of a fierce ideological struggle against the Trotskyists, Zinovievites, Bukharinites and others, extremely repressive measures were not applied to them. The struggle was conducted on an ideological basis. But a few years later, when socialism was already basically built in our country, when the exploiting classes were basically eliminated, when the social structure of Soviet society changed radically, the social base for hostile parties, political movements and groups was sharply reduced, when the ideological opponents of the party were politically defeated long ago, against them repression began.

As for the responsibility for the repressions, the role of Stalin in the creation of the regime of political terror is disclosed in the report in sufficient detail. However, the direct participation in the political terror of Stalin's associates and the true extent of the repressions were not named. Khrushchev was not ready to confront the majority of the members of the Presidium of the Central Committee, especially since he himself belonged to this majority for a long time. There was no consistency in the report in exposing the criminal nature of Stalin's activities and even more so the regime he created. Even less consistent was the exposure of Stalinism in the resolution of the Central Committee of the CPSU of June 30, 1956 "On overcoming the cult of personality and its consequences." The vices of the command-administrative system were ultimately reduced to a cult of personality, and all the blame for the crimes was laid only on Stalin and those from his inner circle. It was emphasized in every possible way that the cult of personality had not changed and could not change the nature of the socialist social and state system. In fact, this corresponded to reality: socialism in the understanding of the political leaders of the country is the second sex. 50s corresponded to the command and administrative system, which continued to exist even without Stalin and his repressive apparatus, being formed by him. The elimination of the most odious figures of the Stalinist entourage from the party leadership, as it were, removed the responsibility for the crimes of Stalinism from other party leaders and from the party as a whole. The political leadership that remained in power did not share responsibility for the past and turned out to be beyond criticism.

Thus, the process known as "The Exposure of Stalin's Personality Cult", for all its historical significance, proceeded in the second half of the 1950s. first of all, as a process of eliminating, and even then not completely, the most negative aspects totalitarian regime without affecting its essence.

64. Foreign policy of the USSR in the 1950s-early 1960s.

By the mid 1950s. there was a rather tense situation in the international arena. The cold war continued. There was a creation of military blocs aimed at containing the influence of the "socialist camp" (SENTO, SEATO, ANZUS). After the signing in October 1954 of the Paris Agreements between the United States, Britain, France, the FRG and other Western countries, West Germany received the right to rebuild its armed forces and joined NATO. This upset the balance of power in Europe and affected the geopolitical interests of the USSR. Germany refused to recognize the post-war borders with Poland and Czechoslovakia. In the face of a real military threat, on May 14, 1955, the socialist countries (Albania, Bulgaria, Hungary, East Germany, Poland, Romania, the USSR and Czechoslovakia) signed the Warsaw Treaty of Friendship, Cooperation and Mutual Assistance. On the basis of this document, the Warsaw Treaty Organization (OVD) was created to carry out a joint defense policy of the socialist countries. Within its framework, there was a unified military command and coordination was carried out foreign policy. The presence of Soviet troops on the territory of Central and South-Eastern Europe received a legal basis. The creation of military-political blocs heated up the international situation and contributed to the intensification of confrontation. Since the beginning of the 1950s, there has been a law in the United States, according to which the countries receiving aid from them were obliged to interrupt all trade relations with the socialist countries. In turn, the socialist countries limited contacts with the capitalist world as much as possible. All their foreign trade activities took place within the framework of the CMEA.

Liberalization inner life after 1953 leads to serious changes in the international policy of the Soviet state. Renewed Soviet leadership (in 1956, Foreign Minister V.M. Molotov resigned, and from February 1957, he held this post for 28 years

A.A. Gromyko), the leadership understood that the Cold War with its arms race was leading the world community to a dead end. It abandons the unrealistic and dangerous Stalinist foreign policy. Suspension ' cold war"contributed to the successful test in the USSR in August 1953 of the hydrogen bomb. It created a temporary military-strategic advantage for the Soviet Union and forced the Western powers to change their policy towards it. The search for new approaches to solving complex international problems that have accumulated over the first post-war decade begins. Among the most important tasks of Soviet diplomacy in the international arena: reducing the military threat, ending the Cold War, expanding international relations and strengthening the influence of the USSR in the world as a whole.

Positive shifts in the international arena began already in 1953.

On June 27 of this year, a ceasefire agreement was finally signed in Korea. The Geneva Conference of 1954 ended with success, the decisions of which settled the situation in Indochina. France withdrew its troops and recognized the independence of Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia. On May 15, 1955, the USSR, the USA, Great Britain and France signed an agreement on the restoration of an independent and democratic Austria, whose parliament decided on permanent neutrality.

The new leadership of the USSR also sees the path to detente in the regulation of bilateral ties with many countries. In 1955 diplomatic relations were restored with Austria and Yugoslavia. After Chancellor Karl Adenauer's visit to Moscow in September 1955, diplomatic relations were established with the FRG. In October 1956, as a result of negotiations, relations with Japan were normalized. The USSR renounced reparation claims and supported Japan's request to join the UN. However, the peace treaty was never signed due to territorial disputes. By the end of the 1950s, the Soviet Union had trade and diplomatic relations with more than 70 countries of the world. In 1954 - 1964 Soviet leaders visited dozens of capitals in Europe, Asia and America. Visits to Moscow were made by prominent politicians and businessmen from the USA, England, France, Italy and many other countries of the world. The Soviet Union at that time proposed new form foreign policy - public diplomacy.

The influence of the USSR is growing after its accession in 1954 to UNESCO - the organization for education, science and culture under the UN - and to the International Labor Organization (ILO). In 1958, the Soviet Union renewed its membership in the World Health Organization (WHO).

The impetus for Khrushchev's foreign policy course was given by the 20th Congress of the CPSU in February 1956. It formulated a new foreign policy doctrine of the Soviet state, which proclaimed a return to the policy of peaceful coexistence of states with different social order, the possibility of preventing wars in the modern era and recognized various forms transition countries to socialism. The proclaimed course was quite controversial. On the one hand, respect for sovereignty and non-interference in the internal affairs of other countries was declared, and on the other hand, the need to provide assistance to both the countries of the socialist camp and the world communist and national liberation movement was emphasized, i.e. in fact, it was about interference in the internal affairs of capitalist and developing countries. The USSR did not refuse to confront the West. Peaceful coexistence was understood as a specific form of class struggle. The doctrine had a pronounced class orientation. It allowed the use of various methods of influencing class opponents in the international arena, from forceful pressure to peaceful initiatives.

As the main direction in ensuring peace on the planet, Khrushchev proposed creating a system of collective security in Europe, and then in Asia, as well as proceeding with immediate disarmament. Wishing to demonstrate the seriousness of these intentions, the Soviet government went for a unilateral reduction in the Armed Forces. The reductions in the army carried out in 1955-1960 made it possible to reduce it by almost 4 million people and bring the strength of the Soviet troops to 2.5 million. Other countries of the socialist camp also carried out significant reductions in their armies. Finally, in 1957, the USSR submitted to the UN proposals to suspend nuclear weapons tests and to undertake obligations to renounce the use of atomic and hydrogen weapons, as well as to simultaneously reduce the armed forces of the USSR, the USA and China to 2.5 million, and then to 1 .5 million people. In 1958, the Soviet government unilaterally declared a moratorium on nuclear testing and appealed to the parliaments of all countries to support this initiative. However, to break the vicious circle of the arms race in the 50s. did not succeed. Western countries were skeptical of the Soviet proposals and put forward unacceptable conditions. In the autumn of 1959, N.S. Khrushchev was the first Soviet leader to visit the United States. His speech at the UN General Assembly on the problem of general disarmament caused a great resonance in the world. In his famous speech, he proposed to completely liquidate the national armies and navies and leave only police forces to the states. This initiative dramatically increased the authority and prestige of our country in the international arena and contributed to the easing of tension in Soviet-American relations.

However, the Soviet leadership was not sincere in its desire for peace. Apparently, it is more correct to consider that it tried to buy time in the arms race. The peace initiatives of the Soviet state were put forward against the backdrop of significant successes of Soviet scientists in improving weapons and rocket technology. In August 1957, the world's first intercontinental ballistic missile was successfully tested in the USSR. For the first time, the territory of the United States turned out to be potentially vulnerable to a nuclear missile strike. At the same time, not only large-scale equipment of air defense, air force and ground forces with missiles began Soviet army, but also the creation of a new type of Armed Forces - the Strategic Missile Forces (since 1962). In addition, the submarine fleet of the USSR Navy also received nuclear missile weapons. Pressure on the enemy "from a position of strength" was still the main instrument of Soviet foreign policy. As Khrushchev stated, "there can be no other policy, our opponents do not understand another language." It was thanks to the threat of Soviet "nuclear retaliation" in 1956 that it was possible to prevent the combined aggression of Western countries against Egypt during the Suez crisis. The USSR significantly strengthened and then consistently expanded the sphere of Soviet influence in the countries that had freed themselves from colonial dependence both in Asia and in Africa.

The expansion of multilateral relations with the socialist countries was one of the priorities of the foreign policy of the USSR. New in relations with the socialist countries was de-Stalinization - the exposure of the cult of personality, the rejection of the theory and practice of Stalinism. An appeal was made from Moscow to the leaders of these countries to democratize their domestic and foreign policies along the lines of the USSR. This call caused the growth of the democratic movement, which united the opponents of the Stalinist model of socialism. The weakening of censorship and the rehabilitation of political prisoners increased criticism of the regimes and led to the radicalization of the population. In the summer of 1956, a general strike broke out in Poznań, Poland, followed by street riots. The speech was suppressed by army units. Only thanks to the flexible policy of the General Secretary of the Polish United Workers' Party, W. Gomulka, who came to power again, was it possible to prevent a large-scale military "appeasement" of Poland with the help of Soviet troops.

Under the influence of the Polish events, the situation in Hungary sharply worsened. In September-October 1956, in the wake of student and worker demonstrations, the new government headed by Imre Nagy tried to get out of its rigid dependence on Moscow, break allied relations with the USSR and other countries of people's democracy, and achieve entry into NATO. The Hungarian Working People's Party was driven out of power and actually found itself outside the law. The total control over all aspects of the life of Hungarian society by the punitive authorities was terminated. At the request of the Nadem government, parts of the Soviet troops stationed in Budapest and other cities were withdrawn from the country. At the same time, the border with Austria was opened. The apogee of the Hungarian "October Revolution" was the events of October 23, 1956, when armed students and workers gathered at a rally in Budapest destroyed the monument to Stalin. In response to these actions, the Soviet leadership decided on military intervention in the internal affairs of Hungary (based on the formal appeal of the "provisional workers' and peasants' government" J. Kadar). On the night of November 4, Budapest was occupied by Soviet troops. The popular uprising was put down. About 2.5 thousand rebels were killed, tens of thousands of Hungarians were injured, many emigrated from the country. The power of the Communist Party and the allied obligations of the Hungarian People's Republic in relation to the USSR and the countries of the Warsaw Pact were restored.

After the events in Hungary, the trend of some liberalization was stopped, ideological pressure intensified and control over the political situation in the countries of the socialist camp became more stringent. Unity in it now rested on the troops of the Department of Internal Affairs.

The second half of the 1950s was marked by a sharp deterioration in relations with the PRC. Since 1957, the Chinese leadership began to express sharp criticisms of the Soviet model of building socialism and the campaign unfolding in the USSR to expose the cult of personality. Mao Zedong openly began to claim the role of the second leader in the socialist world and the world communist movement. China no longer wanted to put up with the role of "little brother" in the family of socialist peoples. Moscow's attempts to smooth over the Soviet-Chinese contradictions by holding meetings of the communist and workers' parties in 1957 and 1960. were not successful. Accusing the Soviet leadership of departing from the principles of Marxism-Leninism and of revisionism, Beijing sharply came out in favor of curtailing relations with the USSR: In 1960, China made claims to a number of border territories of the USSR and Mongolia. At the same time, problems arose in the relations between the USSR and Albania, which supported Mao's policy in the international arena. In 1961, Albania refused to provide the USSR with naval bases and arrested Soviet submarines in its ports. In 1962, Soviet-Albanian relations were actually severed, and in 1968 Albania withdrew from the Warsaw Pact. Since 1962, armed conflicts began on the Soviet-Chinese border. Romania also took a special position within the framework of the socialist camp, which in 1958 achieved the withdrawal of Soviet troops from its territory. To a large extent, they were guided by China and the leaders of North Korea. Thus, in the years of the "thaw" begins the violation of the unity of the socialist countries.

The end of 1950 - the beginning of the 1960s was the time of the collapse of the colonial system. The USSR paid great attention to strengthening ties with the countries of the "third world" ("developing" countries) for two reasons. First, by attracting the newly-free countries to his side, he tried to maintain the balance of power on the world stage. As soon as the help of the Soviet Union weakened, the influence of the United States automatically grew in them. Secondly, the 20th Congress of the CPSU ranked the national liberation movement, along with the communist and workers' movements, as constituent parts world revolutionary process. Therefore, the expansion of cooperation with these countries was seen as a form of struggle against world imperialism. The "developing" countries received serious diplomatic support from the USSR, but most importantly, huge financial assistance. Particularly close contacts have developed with India, Indonesia, Burma, Afghanistan, etc. They were assisted in the construction industrial enterprises and other objects. With the help of Soviet specialists, the Philai Iron and Steel Works was built in India, and the Aswan Dam in Egypt. In total, during this time, with the financial and technical support of the USSR, about 6 thousand industrial facilities were built in different countries of the world.

The most important problem of the international situation in Europe of this period was the settlement of the German question, which now consisted in determining the status of West Berlin. According to the decisions of the Potsdam Peace Conference in 1945, the capital of Germany, like the entire territory of the country, was divided into occupation zones. The Soviet zone in 1949 turned into the GDR, and Berlin became the capital of socialist Germany. The territory of West Berlin was actually part of the FRG. In November 1958, the Soviet government turned to Western countries with a request to review the status of West Berlin, which was to become a free and demilitarized city. The goal was to eliminate the "outpost of imperialism on socialist German soil." The fundamental decision on the status of West Berlin was postponed (in accordance with the agreements between Khrushchev and Eisenhower) until May 1960, when a conference of the heads of government of the USSR, the USA, France and England was to be held. But the meeting never took place: on May 1, 1960, an American U-2 reconnaissance aircraft was shot down over Soviet territory (the pilot F. Powers was detained at the landing site and gave evidence denouncing him as a spy). East-West relations sharply deteriorated. Meanwhile, the Berlin crisis deepened. The western sector of the city quickly recovered with the help of investments from the United States (Marshall Plan). The standard of living here was incomparably higher than in the eastern sector. In the spring and summer of 1961, a significant part of the population, mostly young people and students in large cities, openly came out in favor of changing the political system. In this regard, after preliminary agreement with Moscow, on the initiative of the head of the GDR, W. Ulbricht, a wall of concrete and barbed wire was erected around West Berlin on the night of August 13, 1961. This measure made it possible to prevent "voting with their feet" against the socialist system. The Berlin crisis had a negative impact on the development of international relations in Europe. In September 1961, the USSR unilaterally renounced an agreement with the United States on a moratorium on atmospheric nuclear tests and carried out a series of nuclear explosions.

The East-West confrontation soon brought humanity to the brink of a world war, when in October 1962 the Cuban Missile Crisis broke out. The reason for it was that the United States, trying to overthrow the Castro regime, in April 1961 organized a landing in the Playa Giron area. In the spring of 1962, in order to protect against American expansion, F. Castro obtained from the Soviet Union the deployment of medium-range missiles with nuclear warheads in Cuba. Since Cuba proclaimed itself a socialist country, Khrushchev considered it his duty to protect the "island of freedom". The opportunity to place a military base in close proximity to the United States was also tempting. From the spring of 1962, the USSR began secretly transferring missiles. In October 1962, this became known to the Americans. President D. Kennedy announced a naval blockade of Cuba and demanded the immediate removal of Soviet missiles from the island. Not only the troops of the USA and the USSR, but also NATO and the Department of Internal Affairs were brought to full combat readiness. The political ambitions of the leaders have brought the world to the brink of a nuclear catastrophe. However, a salutary compromise was found. During intensive negotiations on a direct wire between N.S. Khrushchev and D. Kennedy, the parties agreed that the USSR would remove missiles from Cuba, and the United States from Turkey and Italy. In addition, Kennedy guaranteed the security of the Castro regime. With the resolution of the Caribbean crisis, a new effective form of interstate relations arose - personal contacts of heads of state. They made it possible to achieve some easing of international tension. However, the assassination of D. Kennedy in November 1963 and the resignation of N.S. Khrushchev in October 1964 stopped this process. Beginning in the mid-1960s new round arms race.

The emotions experienced during the days of the Cuban Missile Crisis clearly showed the world the need for a treaty on the limitation of nuclear weapons. In 1963, an agreement was signed in Moscow between the USSR, the USA, and Britain on the prohibition of nuclear weapons tests in the atmosphere, in outer space and under water. Soon more than a hundred states joined this treaty.

During the "thaw" period, the USSR succeeded in reducing the heat of the "cold war" and strengthening its position as one of the world powers.

Caribbean crisis and the beginning of the process of "détente of international tension".

65. Epoch " developed socialism» in the USSR and the formation of stagnation in society and the economy (1965 - early 1980s). L.I. Brezhnev. Kosygin reform of 1965 and its results. USSR Constitution 1977

"The era of stagnation" - the accumulation of negative phenomena in public life, government, culture; the aging of the leading cadres, who, in the end, ceased to be capable of governing the country, but on the other hand greatly contributed to the flourishing of corruption, theft, protectionism and blat, the worldwide deception of the state, the growth of drunkenness and crime.

Reasons for stagnation. As a system, socialism is not capable of self-improvement, since it has neither political mechanisms capable of changing the management of society as it grows and develops, nor economic ones, since all movements come from the state. The economic development itself proceeds in an extensive way, expanding by growth in breadth, and therefore is very wasteful. Consequently, the whole life of the country depends on the highest stratum of officials, which is gradually formed into a class. Such a society is poorly capable of self-development, and strives only for expansion, expansion, for the creation of new places of "feeding" for the growing bureaucracy. Thus, the main reason for the stagnation was the exhaustion of development resources available to the socialist system in economic sphere, which put a limit on the arms race, and exacerbated environmental problems. Another reason was the lack of incentives for the ruling class of the nomenklatura to work more effectively.

Brezhnev L. And came to power in 1964. By nature a conservative, but loving power. During his presidency, reform attempts were made by Kosygin, but they failed, not supported by the authorities.

Kosygin reform

The new leadership proclaimed a scientific approach to economics. At the same time, two lines collided: on the application of economic (market, cost accounting, material interest of enterprises and workers) and administrative (improvement of the economic mechanism) methods. The economic reform of 1965 was a compromise between them. Its slogans were "Self-sufficiency, cost-accounting, profitability." main goal it was to combine state ownership, control, plan and economic independence, the initiative of enterprises, to give them a material interest in the results of their work. Enterprises were encouraged to save raw materials and energy, they were allowed to create incentive funds, leave part of the profits used to build housing and infrastructure for workers. Again from the economic councils they returned to the sectoral ministries. Between enterprises were introduced civil law contracts, court of Arbitration. These reforms increased labor productivity. Further it was necessary to deepen them, but to continue further meant to link the military-industrial complex, to limit the power of the party, to reform the collective and state farms. It seemed unthinkable. Reforms began to roll back.

Reasons for curtailing the reform:

1. The weakening of the power of the Communist Party in Czechoslovakia;

2. Discovery of giant oil reserves in Western Siberia;

3. Rising oil prices on world markets.

Results:

· In 1966, the income of collective farms and state farms increased by 15%, which stimulated the overall growth of agricultural production. In general, the eighth five-year plan went down in history as the most successful since Stalin's time: the volume of agricultural production increased by 21%, in industry the growth was 55.5%. incomes of the population increased by 1.5 times. The completion of the formation of a unified energy system can be considered a great success. The Soviet Union has significantly increased its competitiveness in the foreign market. Domestic cars and agricultural machinery, passenger aircraft began to be in demand not only in the social. countries, but also cap.

Constitution of the USSR in 1977. Adopted at the extraordinary seventh session of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR of the IX convocation on October 7, 1977. It consisted of 9 sections, 21 chapters, which included 174 articles. The constitution claimed that it summarized the entire constitutional experience of Soviet history and enriched it with new content; divulged the expansion and deepening of the social. Democracy. The representative bodies were renamed into councils of people's deputies, and the state itself was declared a "common people." The constitution had fundamentally new chapters: "Social development and culture", "foreign policy" and a new section - "State and personality". The system of power and administration established in the previous constitution was preserved. Lost legal force with the dissolution of the USSR on December 8, 1991

66. Foreign policy of the USSR in the 1970s - early 1980s.

Foreign policy, as well as domestic policy, has contradictory results, on the one hand there were quite a few achievements:

1) Greater respect for social rights. State-in, convening international conferences of communist and workers' parties, reducing friction with Yugoslavia;

2) Normalization of relations with Germany, Japan, France. Attempted contact with the US;

3) The first treaties on detente (1963) an agreement with the United States of England with the prohibition of nuclear tests in space, atmosphere and on the ground.

4) Establishment good relations with a number of developing countries India, Indonesia, etc.

On the other hand, foreign policy is characterized by constant crises:

1) 1956 the USSR intervened in the conflict between Egypt and France

2) 1958 Taiwan crisis arose in connection with China's intention to attack Taiwan

3) 1960 an American spy plane was shot down over Ural

4) 1961 Berlin Crisis

5) 1962 Caribbean Crisis

6) 1964 US war in Vietnam. Agreements on economic and technical assistance to Vietnam from the USSR were signed

7) 1972 ABM treaty (limitation of anti-missile defense systems) and strategic arms limitation treaty (SALT-1)

8) 1979 SALT-2 agreement

9) 1979 Soviet troops introduced into Afghanistan

67. Perestroika in the USSR (1985-1991): causes, goals, main stages and results.

The election of Gorbachev to the post of General Secretary (1985) who began perestroika.

1. overcoming economic backwardness, eliminating the deficit of the economy

2. to make the policy more peaceful, to ensure the economic recovery of tension, stop the arms race, start disarmament and conversion, thereby reducing the role of the military-industrial complex in the country

3. make economic and political life more free in order to preserve socialism and the power of the communist party

Stages:

1. 1985-early 1987 - attempts to solve problems in an administrative way, prohibitions of control and shaking up the apparatus, the beginning of the liberalization of internal life and publicity

2. From January 1988 to spring 1989, the policy of openness begins, the introduction of the first elements of independence into the economy, the beginning of disarmament and conversion. During this period, the development of the economy reaches a peak and begins to decline, and the national movement intensifies.

3. Spring 1989 - Summer 1990 On the one hand, democratization is expanding, elections are taking place in the union and autonomous republics. On the other hand, the collapse union relations between the union and the new Russian leadership are aggravated. The deficit takes on monstrous forms.

4. Summer 1990 - autumn 1991 The end of perestroika, a deep national crisis. An attempt by Mrs. coup, dissolution of the CPSU

Target:

Try to breathe new life into the socialist idea, update the leadership, introduce elements of democracy into political life, and elements of private property and self-support into economic life, make the CPSU more like a social - democratic parties western countries. At first, the goals were set to accelerate industrial development. At the same time, the ideas of updating the leadership, strengthening the role of economic incentives in assessing the work of employees were proclaimed.

1. Establish good relations with leading countries of the world (detente)

2. For the first time in the history of the country, a democratic system was created with the relevant authorities (president, parliament, constitutional court)

3. Censorship has almost disappeared. The role of the CPSU KGB in society has been sharply reduced

4. A lot of work has been done to rethink history; many previously inaccessible works of literature and art have been discovered

5. The role of public opinion has become quite large

6. The rights of the republics have risen sharply

7. Made important steps in the field of creating a non-state economy (introducing the convertibility of the ruble, creating a banking system)

8. Facilitated exit from the country, and entry into it

9. The failures of restructuring: the deficit has worsened; the collapse of the union; overestimation of socialism's ability to live, too rapid pace of reforms, inconsistency in their implementation

69. Causes and results of the aggravation of interethnic relations in the USSR in the second half of the 1980s - early 1990s. An attempt to conclude a new union treaty and the collapse of the USSR. Commonwealth formation independent states(CIS).

In July 1990, Gorbachev announced the signing of a new union treaty scheduled for August 20. On the morning of August 19, the putsch of the GKChP (State Committee for the State of Emergency) began. On August 20, rallies and demonstrations against the State Emergency Committee were held in many Russian cities. On August 21, the organizers were arrested. Even those republics that wished to take part in the union treaty now declared their independence. On November 14, in Novoogorevo, 7 republics of Russia, Belarus, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Turkmenistan, Tajikistan announced their intention to create a new interstate formation of the SSG (a union of sovereign states). But the signing of the union agreement did not happen (everyone was waiting for a referendum in Ukraine, hoping that it would also join).

As the central leadership weakened, ethnic conflicts began. From the summer of 1987, national movements began to take on a mass and organized character. Complex processes, which took place in all the republics, the impotence of the union forms of power was accepted by the fact that on December 8, 1991 in Belovezhskaya Pushcha, in the residence "Viskuli" near Brest, the leaders of Belarus of the Russian Federation and Ukraine signed an agreement on the creation of the CIS. This agreement proclaimed that the USSR as a subject international law ceased to exist. 3 states united in the CIS and invited a new state to join it former USSR. Shortly thereafter, the leaders of the Central Asian republics and Kazakhstan announced in Ashgabat their intention to join the CIS. On December 21, the Alma-Ata meeting of the leaders of the Troika and the Ashgabat Five took place. On December 25, Gorbachev signed a decree resigning from the function of supreme commander in chief and resigned from the post of president of the USSR.

A feature of Khrushchev's reforms was that they were designed not for a narrow layer of the nomenklatura or, as they began to say later, the elite, but for the entire population of the country.

Khrushchev's first reforms touched on agriculture - a turning point was laid in the development of agriculture: purchase prices were raised, the burden of taxes was sharply reduced, and new technologies began to be applied. The decision to issue passports to peasants freed them from semi-feudal dependence. The development of virgin lands - with all the shortcomings - played a role in providing the population with food. Khrushchev tried to turn the countryside to foreign experience, the first agricultural revolution. And even his passion for corn was dictated by good intentions, although accompanied by naive extremes. The gigantomania in the countryside, and especially the reduction in personal plots at the end of Khrushchev's rule, also played the worst role. He outlined and almost carried out a 12-year program of relocating people from communal cells to separate apartments, although "Khrushchev" ones, but at that time it was a true blessing for many.

At that time, the country began to solve many social problems. The standard of living of the population in the city and countryside began to rise gradually. However, the planned economic and social reforms bogged down. A serious blow to the hopes of the reformers was the defeat of the democratic movement in Hungary in 1956. Not the last role was played by Nikita Sergeevich's self-confidence, his carelessness in matters of theory and political strategy. "Khrushchevism" - as a concept for the renewal of socialism - did not take place. To use the image that the main opponent of the first Mao Zedong loved so much, Khrushchev walked on two legs: one boldly strode into a new era, and the other got stuck in the mire of the past. 6

Political reforms

Most of all, the apparatus was worried about Khrushchev's reform projects, which were born one after another, sometimes spontaneous, but always consistently directed against the Stalinist model of power. Following the creation of economic councils, what was then with a strong blow Because of departmental bureaucracy, behind an attempt to rebuild the party, Khrushchev conceived an even more radical change in our political system.

Among the first initiatives of the Khrushchev administration was the reorganization in April 1954 of the MGB into the State Security Committee under the Council of Ministers of the USSR, which was accompanied by a significant change in personnel. Some of the leaders of the punitive bodies were put on trial for fabricating false "cases", and prosecutorial supervision of the state security service was introduced. In the center, in the republics and regions, it was placed under the vigilant control of the relevant party committees (Central Committee, regional committees, regional committees), in other words, under the control of the partyocracy.

In 1956-1957. political charges are removed from the repressed peoples and their statehood is restored. This did not then affect the Volga Germans and the Crimean Tatars: such charges were dropped from them, respectively, in 1964 and 1967. In addition, the country's leadership did not take effective measures for the open, organized return of yesterday's special settlers to their historical lands, did not explain the problems of their fair resettlement, thereby laying another mine under interethnic relations in the USSR.

In September 1953, the Supreme Soviet of the USSR, by a special decree, opened up the opportunity to review the decisions of the former collegiums of the OGPU, the "troikas" of the NKVD, and the "special meeting" at the NKVD-MGB-MVD, which had been abolished by that time. In 1956, about 16,000 people were released from the camps and posthumously rehabilitated. After the 20th Congress of the CPSU (February 1956), which debunked the "cult of personality of Stalin", the scale of rehabilitation was increased, millions of political prisoners wandered their long-awaited freedom.

He sought to realize the stated program ideas: the abolition of the dictatorship of the proletariat and the formation of the institutions of the nationwide state, the collective leadership, and the rotation of personnel. And at the beginning of 1964, we - me and G. Smirnov, deputy head of the department of agitation and propaganda of the Central Committee - were seconded to Gorky's dacha to prepare a draft of the new Constitution of the USSR. We were instructed to collect in advance all the best proposals and prepare a note for Khrushchev and other members of the Presidium of the Central Committee. It must be said that here we "looked around" a bit and prepared a note on the basic principles of the new Constitution, which differed sharply from the so-called Stalinist one adopted in 1936. We set the task of separating the party and state power, legalization of political power, holding free elections, permanent work of the USSR Armed Forces.7

One of the main proposals was to establish a presidential regime and direct elections by the people of the head of state. Our note said that the First Secretary of the Central Committee should run for this post, and not replace the post of Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the USSR. It was also assumed that each member of the Presidium of the Central Committee would be nominated for a major government post and major decisions will be accepted not in the party, but in the organs of state power.

Reforms in the field of art and literature

The "thaw" was especially noticeable in literature and art. The good name of many cultural figures - victims of lawlessness is being restored: V. E. Meyerhold, B. A. Pilnyak, O. E. Mandelstam, I. E. Babel and others. After a long break, books by A. A. Akhmatova and M. M. Zoshchenko. A wide audience gained access to works that were undeservedly hushed up or previously unknown. The revival of the cultural life of society was facilitated by the publication of new literary and artistic magazines "Youth", "Foreign Literature". "Our Contemporary", "Moscow", "Neva", "Soviet Screen", "Musical Life", etc. Already well-known magazines, first of all " New world"(editor-in-chief A. T. Tvardovsky), who has become a tribune of all democratically minded creative forces in the country. It was there that in 1962 a short story, but strong in humanistic sound, was published by the former prisoner of the Gulag A. I. Solzhenitsyn about the fate of a Soviet political prisoner - "One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich."

The main direction of the search for artistic intelligentsia, along with understanding the drama of the people during the Great Patriotic War, was the desire to show life as it is, without "varnishing", splendor and hype, without far-fetched "ideologically sustained" heroism - that is, the life of ordinary people with their everyday worries, sorrows and joys. Among the best works of art of different genres of that time were the poems of E. A. Yevtushenko, B. A. Akhmadulina and A. A. Voznesensky, the poems of A. T. Sh. Okudzhava and A. I. Galich, M. A. Sholokhov's story "The Fate of Man", stories by V. P. Aksenov, V. D. Dudintsev's novel "Not by Bread Alone", the first part of the trilogy by K. M. Simonov " The Living and the Dead", films "The Cranes Are Flying" (director M. K. Kalatozov), "The Ballad of a Soldier" (director G. N. Chukhrai), "Outpost of Ilyich" (director M. M. Khutsiev), performances of new Moscow theaters "Contemporary" (chief director O. N. Efremov) and the Taganka Drama and Comedy Theater (chief director Yu. P. Lyubimov). 8

Despite the appearance of new works in which sprouts of free-thinking made their way, on the whole the policy of the "thaw" in spiritual life had quite definite limits.

After Stalin's death in 1953, Nikita Khrushchev unexpectedly came to power. For a long time, Lavrenty Beria claimed the post of general secretary, but Khrushchev and his associates managed to purge the party in time and remove the obvious candidate from all positions.

Khrushchev's period in power is called a time of thaw and unexpected state reforms. The actions of Nikita Sergeevich in power were not consistent, which led to a crisis in the economy and his removal from office. What were the main reforms that Khrushchev managed to carry out, and is it possible to single out their advantages and disadvantages?

Advantages and disadvantages of Khrushchev's reforms

Khrushchev's reform	Advantages of the reform	Shortcomings of the reform
1. 1957 - the consistent introduction of market elements into the socialist model of the economy.	The reform helped to make a turn in the economy towards the consumer, to expand the market. Also, this reform was evidence of a thaw in relations with other powers that prefer to use a market economy model.	The reform led to the fact that bond payments stopped for many years, and this led to significant monetary losses among the population. In addition, there was a general increase in prices for many groups of goods.
2. The anti-religious campaign of 1954-1964, during which Khrushchev tried to reduce the influence of the church on the country's population		The anti-religious campaign, in fact, did not bring any results, because people continued to attend church, hang icons at home. Contrasting the power of the general secretary with church influence was lost by Khrushchev, and this also affected his authority among citizens.
3. Debunking the cult of Stalin and the anti-reforms.	Khrushchev tried to restore the justice of history by amending the understanding of the period of Stalin's rule. Many repressed citizens convicted in Stalin period on false accusations.	In the minds of the people, Stalin was a great leader, and Khrushchev's desire to "slander" (actually, restore the truth) the leader was resented. In addition, Nikita Sergeevich placed too much emphasis on the abolition of all Stalinist reforms, which only hindered the development of the economy and the social sphere.
4. Social reforms 1957-1965	Khrushchev influenced the reduction of the working day to seven hours, wages were increased for workers. In addition, the housing stock increased, apartments were distributed to workers throughout the country, the so-called "Khrushchev" buildings were erected. Housing became more affordable.	An increase in the housing stock had no effect on the law itself, and one could only dream of privatization. In addition, Khrushchev's reforms were not consistent, which led to workers' protests.
5. International reforms	Khrushchev succeeded in achieving a thaw in international relations, reducing the degree of tension between the USSR and Europe. Moreover, improved international trade, the market expanded, and the number of restricted citizens decreased. The development of the space program, which began under Khrushchev, helped strengthen the USSR in the status of a superpower.	The construction of the Berlin Wall and the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962 almost led to World War III. The USSR was teetering internationally on a fine line, and war could break out at any moment. Here, again, the inconsistency of Khrushchev's reforms manifested itself.
6. The school reform of 1958, during which the previous model of education was abolished, labor schools were introduced		Khrushchev abandoned the secondary school model, introducing compulsory education in 8 classes and the subsequent 3 years of labor school. Thus, the general secretary wanted to bring the school closer to real life, but achieved only a general decline in academic performance. In addition, the involvement of the intelligentsia in working specialties led to discontent and speeches. The reform was abolished in 1966.
7. Personnel reforms within the party.	Young cadres capable of leading the country forward were attracted to work in the party.	Young cadres could not count on high positions, career advancement within the party was very difficult. The fight against the cult of Stalin led to the fact that many respected people who supported the former leader lost their jobs. Also, the Secretary General introduced the so-called "permanence of personnel" reform, which led to the fact that the same person could hold a specific position for the rest of his life, regardless of his professional success.

The results of Khrushchev's reform actions

What conclusions can be drawn regarding the reforms carried out by Khrushchev? During the years of being in power, Nikita Sergeevich repeatedly changed the line of his policy. And if the first years of his reign were invariably called the "thaw", then by the beginning of the 60s, the USSR was at the epicenter of the largest political crisis in the last 20 years.

Similar inconsistency was observed in everything. Many reforms were not carried through to completion, and some of them, such as dispelling the cult of Stalin, were based on Khrushchev's personal attitude to politics and economics.

By the beginning of the 60s, the USSR found itself in a deep economic crisis, which could also be explained by the inconsistency of reforms. Khrushchev wanted to preserve the socialist model of power, but at the same time bring the country closer to the democratic norms of the West.

Indignation at the illogicality of politics was heard both from outside ordinary people and by party members. It was not for nothing that Khrushchev was removed from his post, realizing that he would not be able to lead the USSR to a happy future. However, the replacement of Khrushchev by Brezhnev did not lead to the desired results, and the country was in for an economic and social crisis.

e.g. +79131234567

txt fb2 ePub html

What is it

Phone cheat sheets are an indispensable thing when passing exams, preparing for tests, etc. Thanks to our service, you get the opportunity to download cheat sheets on the history of Russia to your phone. All cheat sheets are presented in popular fb2, txt, ePub, html formats, and there is also a java version of the cheat sheet in the form of a convenient mobile phone application that can be downloaded for a nominal fee. It is enough to download cheat sheets on the history of Russia - and you are not afraid of any exam!

Community

Did not you find what you were looking for?

If you need an individual selection or work to order - use.

next question »

The main directions of the economic and political development of the country in 1965-1984, the mechanism of inhibition of socio-economic progress.

Approved by N.S. Khrushchev's mistakes, voluntarism in the internal and foreign policy, mass campaigns,

Khrushchev's reforms and their results.

The solution of economic problems remained the most important task for Soviet society. In the organization of economic development of this period, two periods are clearly distinguished, which seriously differed from each other in terms of methods, goals and final results.
1953-1957 Economic course of G.M. Malenkov After the death of Stalin, the new economic course of the USSR was associated with the name of the Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the USSR G.M. Malenkov (1953-1955). It consisted in the social reorientation of the economy, which meant shifting the center of gravity to the development of the light, food industry, and agriculture.
An attempt was made to solve the food problem and bring agriculture out of the crisis by increasing productivity (i.e., intensifying production) and using the factor of personal interest of the collective farmer. To this end, it was planned to reduce taxes on personal subsidiary plots, increase procurement prices for agricultural products, write off agricultural tax arrears (1.5 billion poods of grain) to collective farms, and increase household plots. It was one of the variants of the new agrarian course.
The program for the transformation of agriculture, carried out by N.S. Khrushchev, was somewhat different from the strategic plan of G.M. Malenkov. In addition to these measures, Khrushchev intended to ensure the rise of agriculture through the rapid expansion of sown areas through the development of virgin lands (an extensive path for the development of agriculture). He also paid special attention to the processes of mechanization of agriculture, for which it was planned in the future to turn collective farms into large industrial-type farms.
In 1954, the development of virgin lands in the Trans-Volga region, Siberia and Kazakhstan began. With the participation of 300 thousand volunteers, mostly young people, 42 million hectares of new land were developed.
Purchase prices for agricultural products were doubled, debts of collective farms on agricultural tax of previous years (1.5 billion poods of grain) were written off, expenditures for social development villages. Taxes on personal subsidiary plots were abolished, which were allowed to be increased five times. In 1958, mandatory deliveries of agricultural products from household plots were abolished, and taxes on it were reduced.
On the initiative of N.S. Khrushchev, the criteria for planning in agriculture were changed, the collective farms received the right to amend their charters.
For 1953-1958 the growth of agricultural production amounted to 34% compared with the previous five years. In order to solve the food problem, the area under corn was increased: from 1955 to 1962. from 18 to 37 million ha.
Administrative and economic reform. In 1957, N.S. Khrushchev tried to decentralize the management of industry, to create a new organizational and economic structure built on the management of industry not according to sectoral (through ministries), but according to the territorial principle.
In order to limit the possibility of interference by local party apparatuses in economic activity, economic councils were created, which were directly subordinate to the union ministry. 141 all-union and republican ministries were abolished and 105 economic councils were created instead.
The reorganization of the management system gave certain results: industrial specialization, intersectoral cooperation increased, and the process of technical reconstruction of the economy took place. The rights and economic powers of the union republics were expanded. However, the reform as a whole not only did not introduce any qualitative changes in economic conditions, but also gave rise to a certain disunity in the sectoral mechanism of the Soviet economy.
Social politics. The economic policy of the post-Stalin leadership, despite the contradictions, had a pronounced social orientation. In the mid 50s. A program of measures aimed at raising the living standards of the population was developed.
The salaries of workers in industry were regularly raised. The real incomes of workers and employees increased by 60%, of collective farmers - by 90% (since 1956, collective farmers were transferred to a monthly advance payment of wages). The law on retirement pensions for workers and employees doubled their size and reduced retirement age. The working week was reduced from 48 to 46 hours, and compulsory state loans were abolished. Trade unions have gained greater rights in production.
Housing construction has become one of the important achievements of social policy. From 1955 to 1964 the urban housing stock increased by 80%, 54 million people received new apartments. The material base of education, health care, and culture was strengthened.
1958-1964 At the end of the 50s. a transition was made from five-year to seven-year planning (1959-1965). Since that time, the process of displacing economic incentives in the development of the economy by administrative coercion began. In agriculture, this trend manifested itself most clearly.
Kolkhoz policy. Among the disproportions of the seven-year plan, the most severe was the crisis in agriculture. Farms experienced a constant lack of electricity, chemical fertilizers, seeds of valuable crops.
In order to industrialize agriculture, collective farms were enlarged (as a result, their number decreased from 91,000 to 39,000). In the course of extensive communist construction, with the aim of turning all property into public property, there was a massive transformation of collective farms into state farms. A characteristic feature was also the consolidation of collective farms at the expense of the so-called unpromising villages. In 1959, a forced purchase of all the equipment of the liquidated machine and tractor stations (MTS) by collective farms was carried out, which undermined the financial situation of rural producers, given that they also did not have a sufficient number of technical personnel.
The corn epic did not give positive results, in 1962-1963. the crisis in the development of virgin lands worsened.
In order to achieve the tasks of communist construction as soon as possible, the authorities launched an attack on private subsidiary plots. The land plots of the collective farmers were again cut down (from 1.5 acres per one collective farm yard in 1955-1956 to one hundred square meters in 1959-1960; in 1950-1952 there were 32 acres), cattle were forcibly redeemed. Against this background, a campaign of public condemnation of traders and money-grubbers, a struggle against the invaders of collective farm lands, unfolded. As a result, there was a decline in personal subsidiary farming. Collective farm workers turned into hired workers.
As a result of the difficulties that arose, the seven-year plan for the development of agriculture was not fulfilled: instead of the planned 70%, the increase in agriculture amounted to only 15%. The food problem in the country has worsened. The resulting food shortage caused a rise in prices, in particular for meat by 25-30%. The economic difficulties coincided with a bad harvest in 1963, which had disastrous consequences. As a result, the crisis in agriculture led to the first mass purchases of grain abroad (12 million tons).
Industry. In general, in the period under review, the average annual growth rate industrial production in the USSR exceeded 10%, which was ensured solely thanks to the harsh methods of the command economy. Scientific and technological progress was considered one of the levers for the development of industry.
Further development of the administrative system. There has been a process of development of vertical centralization of economic councils (SNKh). In June 1960, the Republican Council of National Economy was created, in March 1963 - the Supreme Council of the National Economy (VSNKh). The system of national economic planning became progressively more complex.
The system of governing bodies of the agrarian sector has changed. From March 1962 collective-farm and state-farm administrations (KSU) were created.
The administrative reform also affected the structure of party organizations. In order to strengthen the role of the party in the development of agriculture in rural areas, district committees were abolished (their functions were transferred to party organizations of the Constitutional Court, party organizers in production); Regional committees were divided according to the production principle - into industrial and agricultural. On the whole, the management restructuring reform retained the essence of the administrative and economic mechanism, the territorial management system led to sectoral imbalance and the growth of parochial tendencies of economic councils.
The reorganization of the administrative system has become a permanent phenomenon. Continuous shake-ups of the apparatus and personal displacements seriously disturbed party and government officials who were striving for the stability of their personal position. N.S. Khrushchev, on the other hand, declared his readiness to scatter everyone like kittens. It seemed to the apparatchiks that de-Stalinization did not bring the desired confidence in tomorrow. In bureaucratic circles, dissatisfaction with N.S. Khrushchev was growing, a desire to subordinate him to the apparatus. A major step along this path was the campaign against the creative intelligentsia, as a result of which Khrushchev the reformer lost firm support among them.
Dissatisfaction with Khrushchev was also expressed by representatives of all levels of the party apparatus (after its division into two independent systems and the formation of a kind of dual power). Therefore, a conspiracy against N.S. Khrushchev became inevitable.
Social politics. Initially, positive changes continued in the social sphere. getting better financial situation population, public consumption funds grew. By 1960, the transfer of workers and employees to a 7-hour working day was completed. The introduction of pensions for collective farmers was being prepared. The housing stock increased (for 1959-1965 - by 40%).
In the context of a slowdown in development and the growth of crisis economic phenomena, social policy was not consistent. The government froze for twenty years payments on domestic loans issued before 1957 (in order to reduce the budget deficit). ).
This caused spontaneous demonstrations of the workers. In 1959, with the help of the troops, a 1,500-strong uprising of workers - builders of the Kazakhstan Magnitka (Temirtau) was suppressed. In 1962, a 7,000-strong workers' demonstration took place in Novocherkassk, also dispersed by troops using tanks (24 people died, 105 participants in the unrest were convicted). Working performances were held in many industrial areas - in Moscow, Leningrad, Donbass, Kemerovo, Ivanovo.
RESULTS. During the Khrushchev thaw, a serious attempt was made to modernize. N.S. Khrushchev set the impetus for the development of political processes, embarking on the path of liberalization.
However, the use of the old political and economic mechanism in the course of the reforms predetermined their failure. Course N.S. Khrushchev was characterized by the absolutization of organizational factors, the solution of economic problems by administrative and political methods. The situation was aggravated by the lack of any scientific and managerial foundations. administrative reforms, randomness and subjectivity of the transformations carried out in the administrative and economic system.
NS Khrushchev and the leadership of the party, remaining on the positions of the communist ideology and preserving many of the traditions of the Stalinist leadership, not only were not ready, but also did not strive for radical changes.
After the failures of N.S. Khrushchev's contradictory transformative activity, a fatigue syndrome arose in society, a desire for sustainable forms of social and personal life. During this period, the party-state bureaucracy, or nomenklatura, thirsting for stability, came to the fore in the hierarchy of power, which played a decisive role in the removal of N.S. Khrushchev in October 1964.

• 
  reforms Khrushchev And them results. The solution of economic problems remained the most important task for Soviet society. In the organization of economic development of this period, two periods are clearly distinguished, which seriously differed from each other in methods ...


• 
  reforms Khrushchev And them results


• 
  reforms Khrushchev And them results. The solution of economic problems remained the most important task for Soviet society. In the organization ho.


• 
  Industrialization in the USSR, goals and results. The socialist industrialization of the USSR (Stalin's industrialization) is a process of forced on ... more ».
  reforms Khrushchev and reform unable to give big results, and such activities could not be carried out without the allocation of significant funds by the state. Major social and political results reforms.


• 
  reforms began in the army in connection with the war for access to the Baltic Sea (1700), for them others followed. IN result reforms significantly changed the position of the estates of Russia.


• 
  reforms results.
  With the elimination of I.S. Khrushchev
  IN result


• 
  reforms 1960-1970s: essence, goals, methods and results.
  With the elimination of I.S. Khrushchev the role of the army leadership and security agencies has increased.
  IN result over 25 years (1964-1988), the developed arable land decreased by 22 million hectares.

Found similar pages:10