In your view could the collapse of socialism/ communism have been avoided or postponed in Central and Eastern Europe?

Résumé du document

The main issue is indeed to know whether the system of the Soviet Union could have been reformed in order to last longer. Some reforms could have been conceivable but they were so deep, so huge that it would have led to a complete transformation of the whole system with, for example, redefining the separation between the state and the party bureaucracy. We can say that the collapse of the Soviet Union can be explained by both structural and circumstantial causes. If the structural causes were inescapable in the long run, the mainly avoidable circumstantial causes precipitated the collapse of the USSR.

Extraits

[...] If Gorbatchev were not in power, the situation could have been different and the system might have lasted a bit longer. However the only way to avoid the end of the collapse would have been to conduct huge reforms to answer to the structural weaknesses of the system, which according to me was not possible. The main purpose of the reforms was to face two problems: the economic inefficiency and the ideological decline. Two opposite solutions were possible: either to go back to the Stalinist system or to completely abandon the ideology. [...]

[...] We can say that the collapse of the Soviet Union can be explained by both structural and circumstantial causes. If the structural causes were inescapable in the long run, these are mainly avoidable circumstantial causes which precipitated the collapse of the USSR. However, if the collapse of the system could certainly have been postponed for a while, I do not think that it could have been avoided because I do not believe that such a system could have been reformed. [...]

[...] Actually, the main issue is to know whether communism can be reformed. The example of the USSR and of China shows us that communism is only viable with a strong ideology and a coercive state to secure the indoctrination of the population. Bibliography Veronique Jobert The end of the USSR and the Russian crisis of identity. Shevtsova Lillia (1998) «L'effondrement de l'URSS était-il inévitable?» in L'Effondrement de l'Empire soviétique Philippe Ardant et Marie Mendras (1988) De Khrouchtchev à Gorbatchev le système est-il réformable ? [...]

[...] The aim was to answer to the structural weaknesses of the USSR with market- oriented reforms and a liberalization of the society. With his Perestroika policy, Gorbachev was seeking a weakening of the role of the party. Actually, it led a decline of the importance of the party and a deindoctrination of the population and a loosening of the ties with the other Socialist Soviet Republics, which was the beginning of the separation of USSR. Moreover, Gorbachev's policies threatened the ideological base of society with, for example, putting an end to the identification of a common external enemy with the decision to end the Cold War with the United States. [...]

[...] However, the system could have perpetuated for some time like this, in a “muddling through”. Only circumstantial political causes led to the sudden collapse of the system. The chain of events, the “snowball effect” and the numerous implications of each step of the process of disintegration were determining in the eventual collapse of the regime. believe that politics unlatched the process. The socialist economic system as it existed had been failing for a long time but might have gone on “muddling through” indefinitely.” (p.91 Marie Lavigne The Economics of Transition). [...]