Soviet-Empire.com U.S.S.R. and communism historical discussion.
[ Login ] [ Active ]

Khrushchev

POST REPLY
Log-in to remove advertisement.
Post 30 Jan 2008, 07:23
What's your opinion on Khrushchev? Did he do good or bad? Or did he do more good than bad?
Post 31 Jan 2008, 19:59
Khrushchev did good, he put the well being of his country rather than using all his resources fighting the US.
Brezhnev went on a military spending spree and nearly bankrupted the country.
Post 31 Jan 2008, 20:13
He did good, but I think he had an itch for war.
He was probably the scariest guy in the Cold War, because you had no idea what the hell he was gonna do next.

Didn't he have major issues with the People's Republic of China because Mao allowed private property?
Post 31 Jan 2008, 20:21
Quote:
He did good, but I think he had an itch for war.
He was probably the scariest guy in the Cold War, because you had no idea what the hell he was gonna do next.


He wasn't crazy, he knew that mutual destruction benefited no one.

Quote:
Didn't he have major issues with the People's Republic of China because Mao allowed private property?


Not that I know of, the USSR allowed private property to a large extent. From what I remember China didn't like him because he opposed the development of a Chinese nuclear program.
Post 31 Jan 2008, 20:27
Quote:
He wasn't crazy, he knew that mutual destruction benefited no one.


Well thats common sense.
If both countries destroy each other, and one destroys the other first. You have victory for 3 minutes before you get completely owned.

Quote:
Not that I know of, the USSR allowed private property to a large extent. From what I remember China didn't like him because he opposed the development of a Chinese nuclear program


No? He actually gave China a couple nuclear arms.
Post 31 Jan 2008, 20:37
Are you sure? Someone please correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't there talks about tactical nuclear strikes against China's nuclear developement plant? The Chinese and Soviets were damn near enemies during Khrushchev's reign, he wasn't particularly in favor of the great leap forward, and Mao wasn't in favor of his openess to the West.
Post 31 Jan 2008, 21:03
Originally Kruschev agreed to provide China with some sample bombs to reverse enginneer, but soon broke off all nuclear co-operation during the Sino-Soviet split.

Quote:
Didn't he have major issues with the People's Republic of China because Mao allowed private property?


Definatly not the case. Kruschev adopted more liberal economic policies than previous Soviet governments and Mao strongly criticised him for it, he even claimed it was a stealth capitalist counter-revolution.
Post 01 Feb 2008, 00:26
I don't really feel able to comment on everything that he did and that happened while he was in power, but there's a few things I have in mind.

Cuban Missle Crisis. He didn't bother to send a translator to Cuba, and confused communications, and ended up criticizing Fidel Castro for suggesting that they fire the missiles before an attack, which Fidel Castro denies saying. Krushchev told Cuba that they wanted to put the missles their to prevent the invasion plans against Cuba, but then agreed to have them removed in return for increasing the security of the USSR... basically leaving Cuba exactly where it was before. Kruschev could have had the US end the embargo and give a guarantee that they wouldn't invade Cuba.

He seemed to think that if the USSR would become productive enough "per capita" that people would become convinced by socialism and automatically revolt, which is something I disagree with.
Post 01 Feb 2008, 00:42
Krushchev was a politician, pure and simple. He saw that the people were discontent on Stalin's methods of ruling. Though he had supported Stalin, he moved with the times and began the de-Stalinization of the Soviet Union. At the same time though he allowed successful revolts to happen in the other countries of the Communist Bloc.

Mao used Krushchev as a reason why China was doing so badly, which strained relations with the Soviet Union.
Post 01 Feb 2008, 00:48
Quote:
Kruschev could have had the US end the embargo and give a guarantee that they wouldn't invade Cuba.


and the Guantanamo Bay facility.
Post 01 Feb 2008, 03:42
Quote:
He didn't bother to send a translator to Cuba,

Fidel says there was a translator or someone from the USSR who spoke Spanish very poorly. The Cuban Missile Crisis is like a blame game.
Post 01 Feb 2008, 18:28
He says that the Diplomat new basic spanish, but that there was no translator. I tend to believe Castro's version, because all the pieces fit together the way he describes it, and other people's explanations have contradictions within them.
Post 02 Feb 2008, 01:24
Kruschyov was a short-tempered baffoon who in at least one instance got upset at a UN meeting and banged his shoe on the table. He achieved power by careful maneuvering in the form of scapegoating and demonizing Stalin and his heir-apparent, Beria, who was executed (ironic for someone who condemned Stalin for similar behavior).

His Virgin Lands reform had people planting in areas that produced food not even fit for animals. Let's not forget that Kruschyov was the only leader of the Soviet Union to be forcibly "retired" after returning from a meeting abroad.

Lensky1917 wrote:
He saw that the people were discontent on Stalin's methods of ruling. Though he had supported Stalin, he moved with the times and began the de-Stalinization of the Soviet Union. At the same time though he allowed successful revolts to happen in the other countries of the Communist Bloc.
Which successful revolts? He's the one who crushed the Hungarian uprising in 1956. Also he ordered troops against demonstrators who objected to the way he spoke against Stalin after he took power.
Post 02 Feb 2008, 02:20
Despite that he also did good things like establish the Warsaw Pact and provide cheap oil to Cuba in its time of need. And he beat the U.S. to space. That's something to be proud of.
Post 21 Feb 2008, 07:11
Khruschev was a traitor, Revisonist and Capitalist.

He displayed an arrogant, Anti-Socialist attitude towards foreign people and moved the Soviet Union to a position of Social-Imperialism. He encouraged the "Socialist bloc" to subserviate their economy to the Soviets and produce one or two products to then sell to the USSR. This is more in-common with the colonial economy than a Socialist one.

He and his Revisionist clique no doubt played a large role in the deaths of Stalin, Gottwald, Bierut, Pieck, and other important Comrades between 1953 and 1960 and the removal of much of the Bulgarian, Hungarian and other Socialist leadership and their replacement with Capitalists who, like the Soviet Union, moved back to profit-motive as the primary drive in the economy.

By the time Khruschev was removed, the Soviet Union had restored the Capitalist mode of production and by 1991, the Socialist-structure was no longer of any use to the Bourgeoisie.
Post 21 Feb 2008, 08:15
Spineless moron with no understanding of economics.
Post 13 Mar 2008, 09:18
Khrushchev was above all else, an opportunist. He was pragmatically loyal to Stalin when it was to his benefit. During Stalin's lifetime Khrushchev portrayed himself as a dedicated Marxist-Leninist. He became very close to Stalin for several reasons throughout his career. He maneuvered his way around far more clever Politburo members and candidates. I don't think Khrushchev was particularly concerned about anything except advancing his own career. This type of cynicism is the most glaring aspect of revisionist philosophy - a lack of belief or conviction in anything except the notion that everything and everyone are motivated solely by self-interest. I can't think of a better way to describe Khrushchev.
Post 13 Mar 2008, 13:35
Welcome back, Besoshvili.
Post 13 Mar 2008, 14:59
Krushev betrayed Stalin's principals because Stalin executed Kruschev's son, who was a traitor (he worked for the nazis).
Kruschev had a great personal hate against Stalin, and that's why he made up al those stories about the "death camps" in Siberia.
He also killed Beria, a high-ranked Partymember who had worked with Stalin, and he insulted and degraded Comrade Zjukov, the man who killed the Third Reich.
Because Zjukov had served under Stalin, he was treated like a kind of criminal. Only after the abdication of Kruschev could he be restored in his honour.

Further more, Kruschev was a moron: he gave the order to place nucleair missiles on Cuba. I know that he probably wasn't planning to nuke America, but he did almost provoke a nucleair attack from the Americans and a Third World War.
After the Cuba Crisis the Politburo decided to get him out of command, and three yearq after his abdication, he was even thrown out of the Party
.
Post 13 Mar 2008, 15:02
The reason that there where problems between China and Kruschev was because Chairman Mao was an opposant of Kruschev's revisionism. I have finished reading the Red Book (today), and in it there are many phrases and quotes against Kruschev and his revisionism.
More Forums: The History Forum. The UK Politics Forum.
© 2000- Soviet-Empire.com. Privacy.
[ Top ]