Gorbachev Imperialism

In December of 1991, the world was shocked, of once seeing a super power that was dominating the world beside the United State of America. Moreover, The Soviet Union sudden collapse, which was composed of fifteen countries, exposed the downfall of the political and economic rule of Communism, which was put in place by the Bolshevik revolution in November of 1917. Many westerners predicted and or were happy that the Communistic ruled country finally saw it’s ending, which left only one dominate nation, United State of America. The arms race with the USA seemed to be too much for the USSR, as their economy fell into turmoil. A strong power in the world always needs a strong economy, however Gorbachev changed a strong economy into a staggering economy about to collapse. Another reason why westerners could see the collapse of the Soviet Union in the near future was because of the external factors that played in, for example the Reagan administration, the Afghanistan crisis and the revolutions that took place in 1989. Additionally, the internal factors which were the corruption inside the Soviet Union government as well as the attempted Coup d’état of 1991. All these reasons played a major role in the shocking but relieving collapse of the Soviet Union. Ardent yet inhuman, Gorbachev efforts of reforming the communistic government seemed promising at first, but a streamline of events led to the uneventful collapse of the Soviet Union.

The occupation was followed by a wave of emigration, unseen before and stopped shortly after (it was estimated that immediately, seventy thousand people left the country, with over three hundred thousand leaving in total), typically highly qualified people seeking prosperity abroad. Western countries allowed these people to stay and work without complications. There was also widespread international criticism of the Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia, with the United Nations even voting for a resolution condemning the Soviet intervention as an act of imperialism. It was, however, unsuccessful due to the USSR vetoing it. It certainly heightened

There is a myriad of factors that accounted for the dissolution of the USSR, and the consolidation of capitalist superiority from 1991 onwards after the fall of an autocracy, and demise of a disunited provisional government. The official declaration of the termination of the Soviet Union was December 26 1991; this collapse was addressed by the west as the defeat of communism, and the end of the Cold War. To understand how and why this previously prosperous nation came to fall it is important to look at the major factors contributing to this disarray. I will examine the economic and ethnic problems the Soviet Union faced, as well as the problems with those in power.

For those who do not know much about the Soviet Union, or those intrigued by the almighty Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR), the history of the collapse of the Soviet Union is extremely well documented in Stephen Kotkin's Armageddon Averted: The Soviet Collapse 1970-2000. This relatively short book provides great insight into the downfall of the Soviet Union, as well as to how it could potentially have sustained longer than it did by the Soviet elite. A dramatic shift occurred in the Soviet Union between 1970 and 2000; numerous events and modifications occurred to pave the way for a long and slow decay, as opposed to a rapid and fervent eruption of a crumble that many may have expected. Kotkin provides the readers with a

Countries that relied on the Soviet Union for economic help lost everything when they became independent (Langley 83). The new governments had to control the people and make money for the country (Langley 84). Civil wars and other violent conflicts became the result of reform not happening quickly (Langley 84). Many blamed this on people of different ethnic or religion (Langley 84). Many people also feared the United States taking over because it now had no major rival (Langley

Another country that seen major political developments was the Eastern Europe. The attempt for the Poles and the Hungarians to gain freedom from Soviet domination in 1956 only seen problems. As Moscow could maintain control over its satellites in Eastern Europe by granting them leeway to adopt domestic policies appropriate to these conditions, the Soviet leaders began to recognize this fact. To make socialism more acceptable to their subject populations, as a result Eastern European Communist leaders adopted reform programs. Continued

In late 1991 the Soviet Union collapse and the result was the creation of 15 separate countries. The last leader of the Soviet Union was Mikhail Gorbachev whom came into power in 1985 and had plans for reform. One of the plans allowed market forces to dictate demand and decisions while still being controlled by the government. That plan was called perestroika. The other was called Glasnost and allowed the people to have freedom of speech. Mikhail believes that these plans would save the Soviet Union while it actually did the opposite. The Glasnost plan allows the people critique the government with the fear of punishment. Aggression from the west was also a factor in the fall of the Soviet Union. The countries from the west especially the US

In 1918 the Bolshevik Party became the ruling power in Russia and eventually founded the U.S.S.R and in turn made Russia into a communist country, and along with that came their command economy. It was not until 1991 that the Soviet Union officially collapsed and aborted their communist form of life. Since this is economics I’m going to focus on what exactly economically caused their system to fail. The U.S.S.R. is a good example because it was their command economy that ultimately led to their collapse.

The economies of Hungary, Poland and Czechoslovakia were weak after the war. The USSR’s control over these countries promised communism as a solution. At first, people saw the appeal of the working person’s government. This, however, was not what communism really was. The USSR did not support the rights to private property. The government ran all major businesses. They also decided what goods would be imported and exported. This caused many difficulties for the people of these countries.

The Soviet Command Economy had weaknesses and problems within their time span that they were around. For example they had lack of equipment .Also their agriculture was really bad. They didn’t get enough items to provide their people. The Soviets had many weaknesses in their command economy and their military commitments which resulted in the collapse of the Soviet Economy.

Coming back to Cultural Imperialism. We would like to start with the most rudimentary questions. What is culture. Why do we need to talk about it. What does Imperialism have to do with culture. And what is Cultural Imperialism. When Steger talks about the cultural dimension of globalization, he uses the words “symbolic construction, articulation, and dissemination of meaning” (90). Culture can define an individual, a group, a society, a nation or even the globe. Humans are social beings and since pre-historic times humans have been inquisitive and have embarked upon journeys to find new civilization. Today we are looking for life on other planets. When a person interacts with another, the first judgment he makes is about his nature. Similarly when we find ourselves in a new atmosphere, a new culture, the first few things we pick up are the culture not the economic status or the political scenario. It could be as simple as a greeting in the native language, or knowledge about the local cuisine, clothes or traditions. We all know that Vasco Da Gama brought along spices from his visit to India. What intrigues us so much, must be of huge importance. Culture exists in the form of ideas, language, identity, images and everything the human mind can perceive. Cultural is the inherent reactions, the way we behave socially, what we believe in and what makes us stand apart or defines us as a group. An interesting term at the heart of our discussion is ‘cultural products’. According to

The purpose of this investigation is to assess how significant Mikhail Gorbachev’s Glasnost, and Perestroika polices contribute to the collapse of the USSR. In order to understand how significant of a factor Gorbachev policies were to the collapse of the USSR, we will investigate from how significant were the reforms emplaced by Gorbachev, to how the USSR was doing economically from the time Gorbachev came into power. The main sources for this investigation range from an Excerpt from The cold war: The United States and the Soviet union by Ronald Powaski who states facts about both the economic and political issues of the time. Excerpts from “New political thinking” from perestroika by Gorbachev which states how he believes new political

When Gorbachev made an attempt at economic reform, introduced in 1987 as Perestroika, it was not enough to revive the economy and reverse the period of stagnation and excessive military spending that was crippling the economy. If anything, it made it worse. Perestroika introduced a free market economy, essentially the basics of capitalism, and aimed to improve life for Soviet citizens and working conditions. In theory, the reward of working was meant to stimulate the people to work even harder, which in the end would aid the Soviet economy and revive it. This was far from what happened. The new economic system did not have enough free market elements, causing for the failure of businesses and supply shortages as there were still price controls in place. As profits were limited, production fell, just like in the oil crisis mentioned prior. What Gorbachev devised aimed to keep basis of the Soviet economic structure, but modernize it with aspects of a free market economy, yet it was not enough of a change to revamp the economy. The true ramifications of Perestroika were seen in the USSR’s last few years; inflation was through the roof, the GDP had declined and was continued to fall at an alarming rate, there were shortages of food and clothes, and overall living conditions had greatly declined. While it shortages of goods were not uncommon to the Soviet public, Gorbachev’s policy brought on shortages of basic goods and necessities. He aimed at fixing the economy,

Throughout Not Yet the Post-Imperialist Era, the author, Herbert Shiller, refers to a number of other social theorists and researchers in an attempt to construct a well-rounded definition of the complex and varied concept of cultural imperialism. In doing so, he provides the reader with the broad understanding that cultural imperialism is the phenomena through which a culturally and politically powerful nation, in other words, a first world nation, imposes its culture onto a politically weaker and poorer nation, a third world nation, through its economic superiority and well established market policies for the purpose of reaping a profit. This can be done directly, through the exportation of media such as television and film, as well as indirectly, through the reproduction of

Cultural Imperialism is a term which got fame in late 1960s. It is basically about the cultural characteristics of Imperialism. Imperialism means domination of something. Generally dominant nations tend to invade other country’s culture through media. In this way they not only manipulate the ideology of targeted country but also changed their cultural values. If we look deep in history then we came to know that third world countries are most influenced by this kind of media content. Also these countries wants to enjoy global culture; so they adopt global culture by itself and thus their own culture become extinct.