Soviet-Empire.com U.S.S.R. and communism historical discussion.
[ Active ]
[ Login ]
Log-in to remove these advertisements.

Could Deng Xiaoping Theory have worked in the USSR?

POST REPLY
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 172
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 02 Apr 2007, 21:47
Pioneer
Post 30 Jul 2007, 14:39
I'm curious on whether or not Deng Xiaoping Theory could have worked in the USSR. Certainly it would have been far more complex since the USSR had a much larger industry and bureaucracy in the 1980s and was far more centralized. In addition the complexities of the Warsaw Pact would have made it hard to have
brought reform and opening up to the allied nations. However it could have been possible to have created "special economic zones" of free markets in the Baltic regions, the Black Sea and around the Maritime province. Of course Chinese reform was very dependent on western investment and the west may have been less eager to invest in the USSr especially since labor was less cheap.

Anyway I'm interested on your thoughts.
Stop by WikiMaoist a Marxist-Leninist Wikipedia that anyone can edit add radio, sound, pictures articles etc to the page
All at Wikia Maoist
Soviet cogitations: 3448
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 26 Jun 2006, 15:59
Ideology: Other Leftist
Party Bureaucrat
Post 30 Jul 2007, 17:45
I don't see a reason why Deng Xiao-ping theory would need to have been applied in the USSR. Deng Xiao-ping theory applies a mixed market system to the unique conditions of China. The USSR underwent its own version called the NEP which ended in the mid 1920's. The USSR developed sufficient capital to allow it to progress to a far more heavily planned economy (and frankly from the late 20's to the 50's results speak for themselves).
The moment one accepts the notion of 'totalitarianism', one is firmly locked within the liberal-democratic horizon. - Slavoj Žižek
Soviet cogitations: 9
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 16 Feb 2008, 22:27
New Comrade (Say hi & be nice to me!)
Post 21 Feb 2008, 07:15
Deng Xiaoping Theory was effectively applied in China during the times of Khruschev and Brezhnev. They promoted profit-motive as the primary driving force of the economy and turned to politics rather than revolution and maneuvered a completely Bourgeois system of education and overall structure, to the point that they prefered small elite cadre over the workers and peasants.

Deng Xiaoping Theory represented the defeat of Socialism in China as the Khruschevite revisionist system represented it in the Soviet Union. At that point the people had two choices, to either rise up in various ways and restore Socialism, or to accept Capitalism. They accepted Capitalism in the Soviet Union and the Party destroyed the Union when it was no longer needed and they no longer needed to (or perhaps could) front as a great Socialist father to the oppressed people's. The Chinese will do the same, all we can hope for is that the people can restore Socialism there before things absolutely have to move to warfare.
Forward along the road of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism.

Victory to the Revolutions in India, Bhutan and the Philippines!

Victory to the People of Palestine, Iraq, Afghanistan and Somalia!
Soviet cogitations: 6887
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 30 Nov 2007, 08:37
Unperson
Post 21 Feb 2008, 08:16
Quote:
Deng Xiaoping Theory was effectively applied in China during the times of Khruschev and Brezhnev. They promoted profit-motive as the primary driving force of the economy and turned to politics rather than revolution and maneuvered a completely Bourgeois system of education and overall structure, to the point that they prefered small elite cadre over the workers and peasants.

Deng Xiaoping Theory represented the defeat of Socialism in China as the Khruschevite revisionist system represented it in the Soviet Union. At that point the people had two choices, to either rise up in various ways and restore Socialism, or to accept Capitalism. They accepted Capitalism in the Soviet Union and the Party destroyed the Union when it was no longer needed and they no longer needed to (or perhaps could) front as a great Socialist father to the oppressed people's. The Chinese will do the same, all we can hope for is that the people can restore Socialism there before things absolutely have to move to warfare.


I finally have an ally in my anti-Khruschev stance.
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 4415
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 07 Oct 2004, 22:04
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Resident Soviet
Post 21 Feb 2008, 08:39
It's called Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, and it's a dogma which exaggerates Soviet errors to the point of making the USSR out to be a capitalist imperialist state post-1956. Do you really believe that Khrushchev went so far as to restore capitalism to the Soviet Union RussianLord?
"The thing about capitalism is that it sounds awful on paper and is horrendous in practice. Communism sounds wonderful on paper and when it was put into practice it was done pretty well for what they had to work with." -MiG
Soviet cogitations: 6887
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 30 Nov 2007, 08:37
Unperson
Post 21 Feb 2008, 08:57
Quote:
It's called Marxism-Leninism-Maoism, and it's a dogma which exaggerates Soviet errors to the point of making the USSR out to be a capitalist imperialist state post-1956. Do you really believe that Khrushchev went so far as to restore capitalism to the Soviet Union RussianLord?


No of course not. I already said he created an authoritarian bureacratical oligarchy.
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 14448
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 10 Sep 2006, 22:05
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Philosophized
Post 21 Feb 2008, 16:07
Quote:
I already said he created an authoritarian bureacratical oligarchy.


He didn't create anything he just made it worse. The bureaucratic problems of the USSR started under Lenin.
Image
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 2693
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 01 Mar 2006, 08:59
Party Bureaucrat
Post 22 Feb 2008, 07:20
Code: Select all
He didn't create anything he just made it worse. The bureaucratic problems of the USSR started under Lenin.


Actually, not true. As Sousa and Deutscher related, the Czarist bureaucracy was infamous in it's day. It is lampooned mercilessly in the works of many 19th century writers such as Chekov, Gogol, etc. etc. You can read the directives of Lenin in 1920-22 period urging a purge of the careerists that came into the party that originated from the regrettable importation of wholesale chunks of the old civil service.
Image

"To know a thing you must study it." --Dagoth Ur
Soviet cogitations: 6887
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 30 Nov 2007, 08:37
Unperson
Post 22 Feb 2008, 21:05
The bureaucratic problems were almost non-existant under Stalin, and corruption was pretty low.
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 9306
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 02 Mar 2004, 15:19
Ideology: Other Leftist
Old Bolshevik
Post 24 Feb 2008, 02:52
Greg, by Deutscher, do you mean Isaac Deutscher?
Image

Fitzy wrote:
Yes, because I am poisoning them. They are my children.
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 2693
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 01 Mar 2006, 08:59
Party Bureaucrat
Post 25 Feb 2008, 05:29
If I recall properly, he gives mention to it in his biographies of Stalin and Trotsky. But, I must say, Gogol and Chekov are much more enjoyable to read than he.

Here is some quotes by Lenin and Stalin in this period:

Stalin wrote:
Bureaucracy is one of the worst enemies of our progress. It exists in all our organizations .... The trouble is that it is not a matter of the old bureaucrats. It is a matter of the new bureaucrats, bureaucrats who sympathize with the Soviet Government and finally, communist bureaucrats. The communist bureaucrat is the most dangerous type of bureaucrat. Why? Because he masks his bureaucracy with the title of Party member.


Lenin wrote:
All members of the R.C.P. who are in any way dubious, unreliable, or who have failed to prove their stability, should be removed from the Party, with the right of re-admission upon further verification and test.

1) People who joined from other parties after X.1917; 2) members from among officials and functionaries who had held office under the old governments; 3) people who had held posts involving any privileges; 4) state employees -- these categories should all be subject to a thorough check-up, and workers, both Party and non-Party, who have had contact with the given member of the R.C.P. at his work, should be questioned.

...

Formalities should be reduced to a minimum in the case of real workers, actually working at their factory, and in the case of peasants engaged on their allotments; such people should not be troubled with reregistration.
Image

"To know a thing you must study it." --Dagoth Ur
Soviet cogitations: 6887
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 30 Nov 2007, 08:37
Unperson
Post 25 Feb 2008, 05:53
Of course. But Stalin acted to keep the bureaucratic apparatus from becoming the cancer that it turned into under Khruschev.
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 172
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 02 Apr 2007, 21:47
Pioneer
Post 10 Mar 2008, 23:25
Take a look at this book from the CPUSA

About issues of human rights and socialist development in the Soviet Union, see Human Rights in the Soviet Union by Albert Szymanski, Zed Books, 1984.

An earlier book of his, Is the Red Flag Still Flying, included an afterward that is a (very incomplete) start at an historical materialist analysis of Stalin’s role. (Symanski was an economist and a Maoist who set out to prove the Maoist thesis of "capitalist restoration" in the Soviet Union, but on examining the statistics and realities, came to the conclusion that the Maoists were wrong, that the Soviet Union was still primarily run in the interests of the working class. He used statistics and facts as reported by right-wing academicians, arguing that facts as reported by anti-communists could be used to prove progressive points with greater believability by anti-communist readers.)
Stop by WikiMaoist a Marxist-Leninist Wikipedia that anyone can edit add radio, sound, pictures articles etc to the page
All at Wikia Maoist
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 639
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 29 Jan 2006, 20:57
Komsomol
Post 23 Jun 2008, 20:36
Quote:
Of course. But Stalin acted to keep the bureaucratic apparatus from becoming the cancer that it turned into under Khruschev.


No, Stalin had anyone who didn't agree with him put to death or thrown in the gulag! That is not "acting to keep the bureaucratic apparatus from becoming a cancer". No man is infallible and to claim so is to claim he is a god. Do you think that Stalin was some kind of deity?
Image

"The proletarians have nothing to lose but their chains. They have a world to win."
Soviet cogitations: 6887
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 30 Nov 2007, 08:37
Unperson
Post 24 Jun 2008, 09:42
Two disconnected claims. Evidence for the first one, and I don't even know where the f*ck you got the second one. I don't consider anyone a god (except myself sometimes when I'm bored, but lets leave my delusional fantasies out of this
).
Alternative Display:
Mobile view
More Forums: The History Forum. The UK Politics Forum.
© 2000- Soviet-Empire.com. Privacy.
cron