Is Putin's Russia more like the Russian Empire or Soviet Union (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 05, 2024, 10:18:22 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  International General Discussion (Moderators: afleitch, Hash)
  Is Putin's Russia more like the Russian Empire or Soviet Union (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Is Putin's Russia more like the Russian Empire or Soviet Union  (Read 1194 times)
Benjamin Frank
Frank
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,066


« on: January 26, 2022, 09:40:50 PM »

The Soviet Union was mostly like the Russian Empire.
Logged
Benjamin Frank
Frank
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,066


« Reply #1 on: January 26, 2022, 10:55:20 PM »

The Soviet Union was mostly like the Russian Empire.


In which ways:

-The Russian Empire was controlled by aristocrats while the Soviet Union was run by the communist party with heads of the parties not being related to each other as well.

- The Russian Empire had an official  state religion while  the Soviets tried to stamp out religion

- Due to being an aristocracy the Russian Empire basically had almost all its classes stuck in stone while in the USSR status in society was based on where you were in the party and which position in government you had

- Even their goals in world affairs were very different. The Soviets were far more interested in world domination and with the exception of WW2 all of its allies were pretty much puppet regimes of the USSR. The Russian Empire on the other hand was far less aggressive and was far more willing to work with world powers at the time such as the British and French.


I appreciate that the Russian Empire lasted for over 300 years while the Soviet Union lasted for about 70 years so there is a possibility to pick and choose similarities and differences, but in broad strokes I disagree on all counts, except somewhat for the religious part.

1.The Russian civil service was very similar under both the Imperial Empire and the Communists.  The civil service under Czar Nicholas II largely carried over to the Lenin Administration.

In addition, many civil servants engaged in personal fiefdom building under the Czar, this became even more so under Communism where they also had greater control of previously private businesses.

The brutal attempt to advance Russian economically under Stalin was not that different than the methods used by Peter The Great.  Both Imperial Russia and the Soviet Union were primarily concerned with keeping up with the West, and frequently with adopting Western methods.

2.The Communists gave up trying to stamp out the Russian Orthodox Church.  They also continued to engage in discrimination against other religions.

3.See above on personal fiefdoms.  Most people who were members of the Communist Party were not necessarily supporters.

4.I disagree that the Soviet Union was all that interested in world domination.  I think George Kennan was accurate in his explanation of Soviet interests.  You are correct that Imperial Russia engaged in balance of power politics with the rest of Europe, but Russia always wanted a 'buffer zone.'  To the degree that Stalin extended this buffer zone after World War II, I think it was because the technologies had advanced: the Czars didn't have to deal with rapid transportation like automobiles and trucks.  There was rail very late on, but even though automobiles existed before the start of World War I, the generals still thought that the cavalry would be the main weapons of war.
Logged
Benjamin Frank
Frank
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,066


« Reply #2 on: January 27, 2022, 12:45:41 AM »

To add to my last post: I disagree that either Lenin or Stalin were genuinely communist.  I think the part of the 'vanguard of the proletariat' that appealed to them was 'vanguard.'  

I think that what appealed to them most about communism was the realization that it could easily be transformed into a totalitarian system where there were no other sources of power, in the way that wealthy business owners can challenge government leaders.  I think, stripping aside all of Lenin's B.S rhetoric, that he was a power hungry authoritarian dictator, no different than the czars before him, or all the power hungry dictators throughout history around the world.  So, I especially don't think either really cared about expanding communist ideology around the world.

The only Soviet Leader who may have been a genuine believer in communism was Krushchev who was an impressionable 23 during the Russian Revolution of 1917.

After him was Brezhnev who was essentially a conservative bureaucrat who maintained the state through corruption from on top and especially through allowing the civil service fiefdoms that I mentioned above.

Stalin probably stamped out this corruption during his reigns of terror, but there have been papers written on late Stalin era (1943-1953) civil service corruption. 

For instance: https://www.jstor.org/stable/20060294
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.024 seconds with 12 queries.