Who was more responsible for the end of the Cold War and the Soviet collapse?

[Bo]

Gorbachev, by far.

[Bo]

Reagan baby.

Mr. Gorbachev, if you desire peace, tear down this wall!!! I'll tell you what that's comparable to the sermon on the mount and was the best speech in presidential history until Bush landed on the aircraft carrier.

And clearly Gorbachev did that solely because Reagan told him to.

Reagan achieved matters peacefully.

First of all, the U.S.S.R. didn't even collapse under Reagan's watch. And secondly, another President would have handled the Soviet collapse just as well. No politician was stupid enough to go to war with the U.S.S.R. And had another hardliner come into power (in the U.S.S.R.) in 1985, the U.S.S.R. would have probably liberalized its economy without giving its people more political freedoms. Thus, it would have survived at least several decades longer and would have probably looked like China today (free-market dictatorship). Which goes back to my point--everything depended on who was the Soviet leader during this time. Who was the U.S. President back then made very little difference in whether the U.S.S.R. would collapse or not. Finally, if JFK or Nixon would have told Khrushchev/Brezhnev to tear down the Berlin Wall, you think the U.S.S.R. would have just tore it down? No sir.

[Bo]

You do realize that Reagan's foreign policy was a bit more than "tear down this wall" right?

I know that, but I also know that Reagan's foreign policy was a very minor factor, if any, in the collapse of the U.S.S.R.

[Bo]

I see "planned economy" isn't on the list.  I suppose Gorby out of the sh**tty options listed, but he was just in control of the timing of it....the collapse was inevitable.

Actually, Soviet collapse was not inevitable. A different leader could have just liberalized the Soviet economy without giving the Soviet people more political freedoms. Thus the U.S.S.R. would have been similar to China today (a capitalist dictatorship) and would have survived and thrived for at least several more decades.

[Bo]

I see "planned economy" isn't on the list.  I suppose Gorby out of the sh**tty options listed, but he was just in control of the timing of it....the collapse was inevitable.

Actually, Soviet collapse was not inevitable. A different leader could have just liberalized the Soviet economy without giving the Soviet people more political freedoms. Thus the U.S.S.R. would have been similar to China today (a capitalist dictatorship) and would have survived and thrived for at least several more decades.

Of course, a major difference is that only 51% of the Soviet population were ethnic Russians, while China is made up of 92% Han Chinese.

Holding the PRC together is far easier.

However, about 70% of the Soviet population was made up of Slavs. That is a pretty large majority.

[Bo]

However, about 70% of the Soviet population was made up of Slavs. That is a pretty large majority.

And almost 90% of the population of Yugoslavia were made up of Slavs...

Those were still distinct ethnicites/nationalities though.

Still, Russians, Ukrainians, and Belorussians have the same religion (Eastern Orthodox), while Croats, Serbs, and Bosniaks have different religions.

[Bo]

The soviet union was bound to collapse in 1941 hitler referred to it as a rotting structure and he was right.

Yes socialism was the cause of the collapse because it does not produce enough wealth to keep up with needs and demands. Let that be a lesson to us now.

So what does Reagan have to do with that?

[Bo]

The soviet union was bound to collapse in 1941 hitler referred to it as a rotting structure and he was right.

Yes socialism was the cause of the collapse because it does not produce enough wealth to keep up with needs and demands. Let that be a lesson to us now.

So what does Reagan have to do with that?

Just the simple fact of cutting taxes to grow the economy. The Soviets collapsed sooner than they would have because they didn't have what it took to compete with us economically.

The economy grew under Reagan roughly under the same pace that it grew before him. Thus, he didn't have anything to do with the rate of economic growth. And no, the U.S.S.R. collapsed sooner than they would have because Gorbachev liberalized the political system of the U.S.S.R. in addition to the economy. Liberalizing the political system allowed people to freely express themselves, which eventually led to massive demonstrations in Eastern Europe, and which led to the collapse of the U.S.S.R.

[Bo]

King Fahd

Not an option, but I see where you're coming from--He greatly helped cause the oil glut of the 1980s.

[Bo]

I want someone out of the 7 posters who voted Reagan to tell me specifically why they voted for him. And please don't mention anything about Reagan telling Gorbachev to tear down the Berlin Wall.

[Bo]

http://www.slate.com/id/2102081/#sb2102135

Heres a not horrible article for the Reagan case.

I seriously doubt Reagan's actions pressured Gorbachev to do much. The U.S.S.R. outspent itself primarily by fighting in Afghanistan. The program for the U.S. to fund the Mujihadeen began under Carter, so Reagan just continued it. As for Reagan spending a lot on missile defense, that probably made the U.S.S.R. a little more cautious and willing to spend a little more, but the war in Afghanistan was the main thing that bankrupted the U.S.S.R. The article itself even says that without Gorbachev, the U.S.S.R. would have probably survived much longer. The Revolutions in Eastern Europe in 1989 which helped bring about the demise of the U.S.S.R. started under Bush Sr., not Reagan. Why didn't Eastern Europeans rebel under Reagan if he was so tough and Bush Sr. was so cautious? Because they didn't care who the U.S. President was. They just wanted to exercise their new political freedoms granted to them by Gorbachev and to protest their regimes. And frankly, I think that Gorbachev would have implemented his reforms regardless of who was President. Gorbachev knew that the U.S.S.R. was collapsing and needed something to be changed if it was to survive. I don't really see Reagan being a large factor in encouraging Gorbachev to do anything.

[Bo]

Thanks for skipping the Solidarity and all other movements in the Soviet Bloc.

Sorry Kalwejt.

[Bo]

The USSR was bound to collapse for even existing. Socialism doesn't work anywhere. China is only surviving because they have a liberalized economy for the most part

To be fair, the U.S.S.R. could have just liberalized their economy (without increasing political freedoms) just like China did.