unfortunately the west was pretty much destroyed after ww2. but even in 1989 there was still hope that the soviet nightmare would finally end. and it did, thankfully.
unfortunately we’ve been left with the russian mafia state to deal further blows to the region.
The famines in the USSR were partially caused by US trade embargoes on the USSR preventing them from buying modern farming equipment and grain supplies.
That's not to say the USSR itself bore no blame. They definitely did, but the US did everything it could to ensure that system would collapse.
Also, it seems unlikely to me that Soviet planning relied on buying farming equipment from the USA. Weren't they rather too proud for that?
Did the USA also deny to sell them food?
Edit, since YC doesn't allow me to write more comments: yeah ok maybe people were starving before that, the point was, the US did not cause that. Maybe their superior technology could have helped, but that is not the same as blaming them for causing the famine. If the US hadn't invented those machines, Russians would have starved all the same, and there would have been no US to blame for it. That is what I meant.
As for trade embargoes, I am not a fan. But I can also not blame the US for wanting to curb the spread of communism, which is decidedly not a harmless ideology. So I guess trade embargoes tend to be a first step, preferred to actual war.
Also not convinced that communists would have loved to trade. Wasn't everything Western frowned upon? You could get into jail for listening to Jazz music? That doesn't sound very open minded to me, and not a good basis for trade. I think they wanted to show that they could do better than capitalism, and to rely on capitalist products would have been an admittance of failure.
Yes, they did. You don't know your history or are deliberately ignoring parts of it.
Russia and the Russian Empire was always struggling to produce enough food due to the nature of its landscape. Barely any of it is suitable for farming.
This is the main reason Russia always tries to expand westward (that and its lack of warm-water ports for trade). It's simple self-preservation. I'm not excusing some or all of the horrible shit they've done to pursue this goal either, but it is understandable. The US did exactly the same when it swarmed over North America wiping out or subjugating every Native tribe it encountered.
The arable land in Russia is incredibly slim and was mostly situated on its western countries bordering Europe. Most of Russia and many of its satellite states during the USSR is and were unsuitable for farming.
On the subject of US/NATO trade embargoes, the US did a similar thing to Cuba and some South American states for decades for no good reason other than 'communism bad!'.
Trade embargoes used as a tool to fight an ideological war by weakening the target country's economy, thereby discrediting its economic model by artificially limiting supplies of grain and efficient farming equipment.
All they ended up doing was hurting the regular people who probably couldn't have cared less what system they were under. They were too busy trying to live their lives.
There was nothing in the Soviet system that prevented it from trading with the west from an ideological standpoint either. The refusal to trade came from the west; and the only reason trade with the west was hindered was because the US wanted to fight an ideological war by undermining its enemies economies.
The reality is, the so-called free-market champion that is the United States engages in market distortion to eliminate rivals all the time. The best example recently was the Iraq War. That was a response to Saddam Hussein's plan to stop trading oil in dollars and switch to Euros instead.
I feel like you are deliberately ignoring information that doesn't satisfy your world view.
I cannot help you with that.
Some more info on Russia's motives:
https://www.businessinsider.com/10-maps-that-explain-russias...
this is so false it’s crazy.
i suggest you read a bit about what you’re writing about.
wikipedia is a good start, but it’s just a start: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_trade_of_the_Soviet_...
I read history textbooks written by actual historians and on this particular subject, I speak with people who lived through it on a regular basis and spend time in former Soviet states; they are my extended family through my partner.
You, clearly, have spent no time in any former soviet states and I'd wager you've never spoken to an Eastern European native.
I have no wish to continue talking to someone who can't post anything substantial.
US did sent major aid for Famine in '20s, but famines in 30's and 40's were covered up by Moscow so nobody knew about them for a while.
a system that killed as many people as the nazis deserved a lot more than just a revolution and some oligarchs.
i don’t think you truly understand the long term damage the soviets did in eastern europe. it’s been literally apocalyptic. and the effects are still felt today.
That doesn't change the fact the US engaged in market distortion and economic coercion on ideological grounds.
If that fact makes you uncomfortable, I suggest you inform your representatives, because they are still doing it to weaker nations that don't dance to the American tune today.
It might surprise you to hear as well that there are quite a few things people in Eastern Europe miss from the Soviet days. The heavy focus on community, childcare, free healthcare and and quality education in the trades and higher professions for example.
My partner and her family hate how individualistic and self-serving people can be in the west. There's basically no solidarity that compares to what they had in that system. That doesn't mean they want to go back to it, it just means there are lessons that we can learn from that system to improve our own.
Make no mistake, the USSR did some things right. It's mistakes do not erase them. Don't hold them to a standard you are not willing to hold your own country to, because the failings of capitalism and the lives lost due to those failings each year are legion.
To think otherwise is nothing short of ideological fundamentalism.
Posting something more substantial than "they deserved it" would be appreciated.
Otherwise don't bother.
The people who were lucky not to end up in jail, Gulags, banned from good jobs or made to work in the coal mines, you mean. Who were lucky to be allowed to go to university and take on an interesting job.
Survivor bias might play a huge part here.
Of course there were people who benefited from the system.
You mention "quality education in the trades and higher professions for example." - what percentage of the population got to enjoy that?
Community - as long as you didn't dissent, I guess? What if you didn't approve of everything the government did? Then community turned into people spying to you and ratting you out to the secret police?
Childcare and healthcare are available in non-communist countries, too. Besides, childcare meant being forced to give up your children at three months, so that you could go back to working and doing your part for the common good.
"the USSR did some things right."
Can you give some specific examples?
All the examples I gave were freely available even to the regular workers. I've spent enough time in Poland and Ukraine to know I'm getting this information from people who actually lived through this. Primary sources.
Most wouldn't go to university, sure, but that is also true of the west. Not everybody goes to university, some become labourers or take up a trade.
Free child care, free healthcare, free education. Even free psychiatric help (something we sorely need in he west). The quality of this varied greatly sure, but it was freely available. These are basic socialist principles that are practices even by enlightened western nations today (just not the US, obviously). These were pillars the USSR was built on.
The fact that it had colossal failings elsewhere does not detract from this.
> Can you give some specific examples?
I already did.
I'm not denying the system was highly corrupt and many people suffered, but you are denying even basic truisms that you could confirm yourself if you got out of your bubble or read some history books.
The things I am saying are not excusing the horrible things the system engaged in. It would be interesting if you held your own country to the same standards as well. It wouldn't come out as clean and shiny as you think.
You are arguing from the perspective of someone who thinks there was literally NOTHING positive about the system at all. You are deliberately ignoring what I am saying and your responses in this thread have been little more than "I disagree because the USSR was bad".
This is just pure fundamentalism and I'm not going to continue arguing with an ideologue. It's wasted effort.
I'm done.
A friend from Poland told me how everything had seemed hopeless and she had no real perspective for her future life, until "the miracle happened" (her words) and borders and restrictions were lifted.
I think the friends you have may have been from very privileged circles in those countries, if their memories are so positive.
Childcare, I also mentioned the background: women were supposed to contribute their share of work for the common good. Meanwhile they had to give their kids to the childcare to start with their early indoctrination.
Health Care: sure, it is a good idea. But I don't think the people who were sent to Siberia or the coal mines received good health care. So at the end of the day, it wasn't really free for everybody, just for the people who sucked up to the system. Which is also a price.
I think it may be you who is the ideologue here.
what are writing about? pre 1947?
the USSR wanted nothing from the “filthy capitalists”.
“There were no major famines after 1947. The drought of 1963 caused panic slaughtering of livestock, but there was no risk of famine. After that year the Soviet Union started importing feed grains for its livestock in increasing amounts.”
most of the issues of Russia of today (and the rest of eastern europe/ussr) stem from communism and its planned economy. during the latter days of the soviets the amount of graft/corruption was incredible. the factories would churn out garbage 24/7. while regular folk had no heating and electricity. this led to even more corruption and an individualist mentality post-breakup.
the west might have contributed to this downfall, but 1. this downfall was completely normal and partly expected and 2. the main culprits can be found among the populations of russia and eastern europe.
my 2 cents