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

Collapse of the Soviet Union Engineered?

POST REPLY
Soviet cogitations: 46
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 10 Feb 2006, 13:50
Pioneer
Post 11 Feb 2006, 12:52
According to this conspiracy theory, there is much truth in KGB defector Anatoliy Golitsyn's 1960s prediction that the Soviet Union would fake its own collapse to disarm the west. Golitsyn wrote the book 'New Lies for Old' in the 1980s detailing this plan (and a 1995 followup 'The Perestroika Deception'). We know that Golitsyn was right about the 'collapse' part, but was it really a maneuvre?

Do you think it is likely that the USSR was capable of doing this?


The Golitsyn Predictions

Interview: The Perestroika Deception (part I)

Interview: The Perestroika Deception (part II)
[+-]
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 1942
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 12 Jul 2005, 01:11
Party Member
Post 11 Feb 2006, 15:37
Quote:
Even if one rejects Golitsyn's overall thesis -- viz., that Gorbachev's changes comprised a long-term strategic deception -- one must still acknowledge that Golitsyn was the only analyst whose crystal ball was functioning during the key period of the late 20th century.


False, President Reagan constantly stated that the USSR is not permanent.

Quote:
When the Soviet Empire collapsed in 1989, the CIA was chastised for failing to foresee the change. "For a generation, the Central Intelligence Agency told successive presidents everything they needed to know about the Soviet Union," said Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan, "except that it was about to fall apart."


And what was President Bush Sr, former director of the CIA doing in the former USSR urging them to be independent of the union?
Soviet cogitations: 46
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 10 Feb 2006, 13:50
Pioneer
Post 11 Feb 2006, 16:17
Quote:
False, President Reagan constantly stated that the USSR is not permanent.


Reagan never thought the fall would be a maneuvre to disarm the west, right? He embraced perestroika. And I think the article was referring to Golitsyn's predictions of *how* the fall will happen, i.e.:

"Golitsyn provided an entire chapter of such predictions, containing 194 distinct auguries. Of these, 46 were not soon falsifiable (it was too early to tell, e.g., whether Russian economic ministries would be dissolved); another 9 predictions (e.g., of a prominent Yugoslavian role in East-Bloc liberalization) seemed clearly wrong. Yet of Golitsyn's falsifiable predictions, 139 out of 148 were fulfilled by the end of 1993 -- an accuracy rate of nearly 94 percent. Among events correctly foreseen: "the return to power of Dubcek and his associates" in Czechoslovakia; the reemergence of Solidarity" and the formation of a "coalition government" in Poland; a newly "independent" regime in Romania; "economic reforms" in the USSR; and a Soviet repudiation of the Afghanistan invasion. -Golitsyn even envisioned that, with the "easing of immigration controls" by East Germany, "pressure could well grow for the solution of the German problem [by] some form of confederation between East and West," with the result that "demolition of the Berlin Wall might even be contemplated."
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 675
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 05 Nov 2005, 21:16
Komsomol
Post 11 Feb 2006, 16:26
Quote:
According to this conspiracy theory, there is much truth in KGB defector Anatoliy Golitsyn's 1960s prediction that the Soviet Union would fake its own collapse to disarm the west.


Thats exactly what the fervently anti-communis John Birch Society believes. How ironic that communist would be agreeing with such.
"Its the ones who are subject to occupation that ultimately get to decide whether it was benicfial or not".

Myself.
[+-]
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 1942
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 12 Jul 2005, 01:11
Party Member
Post 11 Feb 2006, 16:42
Quote:
Reagan never thought the fall would be a maneuvre to disarm the west, right?


You are assuming that the collapse of the USSR was indeed a maneuver so as to disarm the west. The poing of the debate is to ascertain the validility of this information. But in a sense, the collapse of the USSR is what prompted the Pentagon to construct the army as a fast maneuverable force rather than a massive heavy weaponry force.
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 344
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 15 May 2005, 17:11
Komsomol
Post 11 Feb 2006, 22:25
It's really hard to speculate on this..
On one hand it seems crazy to do something complex and huge as this, on the other hand it is probably the only way the USSR could try to win the Cold War, by disarming the west without them knowing it. The Cold War was a huge stalemate, so something genious had to be planned in order to prevail over the other superpower. If this is what happened, I don't know, but it's not impossible.
Image
Soviet cogitations: 46
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 10 Feb 2006, 13:50
Pioneer
Post 12 Feb 2006, 06:13
Quote:
Thats exactly what the fervently anti-communis John Birch Society believes.


I don't trust John Birch Society on most things, but they are not the only ones who believe this theory. Some people in the CIA used to believe Golitsyn, but (for some reason) they don't anymore.

Quote:
The poing of the debate is to ascertain the validility of this information.


Ah, you're right of course. That article was after all referring to the accuracy of Golitsyn's other predictions; about the details.

It's interesting how some people think Gorbachev was an American CIA agent to dismantle the Soviet Union. I find this theory more likely, judging by how incompetent the CIA was.
Soviet cogitations: 4394
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 16 Jun 2004, 17:30
Politburo
Post 13 Feb 2006, 10:44
...And the starving masses of alienated Russians they let down would clamour in approval of such a manuever?

No way.

-TIG
Alis Volat Propriis; Tiocfaidh Ar La; Proletarier Aller Länder, Vereinigt Euch!
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 4177
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 18 Sep 2004, 16:21
Politburo
Post 13 Feb 2006, 12:12
The collapse of the Soviet Union was engineered, but not by the Communists nor by the CIA. It was the Soviet bureaucratic apparatus itself which caused the collapse. They had never had any real faith in the system, and were interested only in feathering their own nests, like any bureaucracy. They looked out at the Western capitalist world, and they saw their peers - the Western bourgeoisie - enjoying a much better lifestyle and with much more wealth than they had. They were envious of the Western bourgeoisie, and wanted the same perks and privileges of power. They therefore threw out the ideology of the Soviet system and brought in the capitalists, because it was in their material interests to do so. This historical tragedy was caused, in the first instance, by the lack of any organic connections between the apparatchiks and the working class - the bureaucracy became autonomous from the toiling masses and eventually became their enemy. This was primarily the result of the two decades of Brezhnevite stagnation and bureaucratism. Trotsky once claimed that Stalin was the tool of the bureaucracy, their puppet figurehead. I believe he was mistaken in this; one of Stalin's main targets during the Great Purge of the late 30s was precisely the bureaucratic apparatus which Trotsky claimed Stalin served. No, if any Soviet leader was a mere figurehead for the bureaucracy, it was Brezhnev, and the outcome was precisely what Trotsky had predicted for such a regime: either a workers' uprising which would restore real Socialism, or a bourgeois reaction and a restoration of capitalism. Unfortunately, the latter is what actually happened.
"Comrade Lenin left us a great legacy, and we fucкed it up." - Josef Stalin
Image
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 344
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 15 May 2005, 17:11
Komsomol
Post 13 Feb 2006, 12:24
Brezhnev was a puppet with the burocracy pulling the strings
Image
[+-]
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 1942
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 12 Jul 2005, 01:11
Party Member
Post 14 Feb 2006, 04:34
Quote:
Brezhnev was a puppet with the burocracy pulling the strings


No Brezhnev was the bureaucracy. I do believe that it was he and his fellow nepots who got Nikita out and put themselves in.
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 344
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 15 May 2005, 17:11
Komsomol
Post 14 Feb 2006, 16:18
you forget to mention that Brezhnev was in the last years of his life almost incapable of leading the USSR, he was very sick and old, some said he was already dead before he died
no, seriously he was a wreck
Image
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 4411
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 07 Oct 2004, 22:04
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Resident Soviet
Post 14 Feb 2006, 18:05
Yes, I have some of his speeches. At the end he was just slurring all his words together and making so many grammatical mistakes.
"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
Alternative Display:
Mobile view
More Forums: The History Forum. The UK Politics Forum.
© 2000- Soviet-Empire.com. Privacy.