stormthebeaches wrote:How big a role did economics play? I would like some numbers.
Which numbers? Suffice to say, and to mention, a few general facts:
1) the growth has been more extensive than intensive in the USSR since the 1970s
2) the industrial practices and models of organization of the USSR were similar to those of the 1930's Fordism - a robust industrial practice, but not modernized, hence lagging productivity
3) the attempt at reform in 1985 resulted in several economy-crippling laws, one of which in 1987 opened runaway inflation
4) the USSR had become a net grain importer in 1962 and onwards, the reasons for this were the Soviet Union's desire to match the calorie diet of the West in meat. The USSR used it's own grains to create food for people, but bulk feed grain for cattle was imported from the West en masse, creating a large meat industry; by 1980s the Soviet Union citizen's ration was reaching 3300+ calories per day (depending on the Republic), and he was exceptionally well supplied with meats, milk and fish for one. However, that came at a heavy price.
5) the USSR had a debt before the Western nations; coupled with the inflation of the late 1980s, that debt threatened to become runaway;
6) in the mid-1980, oil prices fell; however, that was but one factor in the economic crisis.
7) World War II had a heavy impact on the USSR; it skewed the balance of industry in the USSR even more in favour of heavy industry; the later development of light industry lagged behind and was often neglected. This led to shortages and deficits negatively impacted the people's opinion.
Some industries had declined since the late 1970s, despite the overall industrial growth maintaining itself until 1989 (after that the rapid inflation made the growth question rather moot).
If you want some certain, particular numbers, feel free to ask me.
Certainly though the economic position of the USSR was not the sole, and quite probably not the main reason for it's downfall; there are states with extremely bad supply situation which did not collapse. Modern Russia is one of them, as are say North Korea, many African regimes, Latin American countries, and a plethora of other nations.
Personally I tend to take R.E. Allen's opinion that it was wrong decisions of the Soviet planners more than anything (including industrial disparity between light and heavy industry, as well as bad decisions in the late 1980s) which brought such troubles, and the collapse. This opinion is well substantiated in his book
Farm to Factory.
There are people who hold other opinions, of course, and as I'm biased I figure I should refer to them at least. For one, there is the Russian libertarian economist Gaidar, head of the post-Soviet economic reform and privatization program in Russia, who wrote "
Death of the Empire", which is a libertarian critique of the late Soviet economy and posits the reasons for collapse being primarily economic. This is probably the best arguments pro the "economic" and anti-Soviet side of the debate.
stormthebeaches wrote:Did internal political reasons play a part? I'm thinking about policy makers in Moscow and the nationalist movements in Eastern Europe?
Certainly yes. I would advise you reading a few threads from this forum, like
this one, and maybe others in the archive thread.
Gorbachov's actions vis-a-vis other Union republics did little to stem nationalism and even extreme nationalism, and often exacerbated the issue (for example, the replacement of Kazakh SSR leadership with ethnic Russians, which led to riots). Etc.
stormthebeaches wrote:Did the Soviet-Afghan war accelerate the Soviet Union's collapse? I've heard that the war was a huge blow to Soviet moral and lead to reformists taking control.
The Soviet-Afghan war was a major waste of money. It was also frowned upon by the Soviet leadership. Brezhnew often raved at Ustinov, for example, asking "When willl this fucking war end? ...you said the war would not last long! Our children are dying there!"
It wasn't a blow to "Soviet morale", because the war was hardly much known to the general society. The war in Afghanistan was a local conflict which left a heavy impression on the leadership and the Army, but the ordinary citizen didn't know much.
stormthebeaches wrote:How big was Ronald Regan's role in bringing down the Soviet Union? I suspect that it was very small but I would like some numbers here.
Ronald Reagan had no "role" in bringing down the Soviet Union. Any American leader would draw the USSR into an arms race - such are the fortunes of superpower competition. The arms race was unfortunate for the USSR, because it exacerbated the problem of industry being oriented to Heavy Industry (Goods type A) and Light Industry (consumer goods, Goods type B) being neglected.
stormthebeaches wrote:Could the Soviet Union have survived and what policies could it have realistically taken to ensure its survival?
What policies could've Brezhnew take
What if the USSR survived?
General overview:
USSR 1980s - photos
USSR 1980s - photos
Life in the USSR
Economic materials:
Soviet Industrialization