Thaw of the reign of which Soviet figure. The phenomenon of Khrushchev's "thaw"
USSR during the Khrushchev Thaw
New approaches to communicating with the world... With the coming to power of the post-Stalin leadership " cold war“entered a new phase, signs of a “thaw” in the international situation appeared: the war in Korea was over, relations with Yugoslavia began to improve, and the thesis was proclaimed that there would be no winners in the third world war due to the destructive nature of nuclear weapons. The 20th Congress of the CPSU (1956) proclaimed peaceful coexistence as the main principle of Soviet foreign policy. The USSR submitted proposals to the UN: on the suspension of nuclear weapons tests and the adoption of obligations to renounce their use; on the reduction of the armed forces of the USSR, USA, China; on the liquidation of bases on foreign territories. In 1958, the USSR unilaterally stopped conducting nuclear tests. Western countries were skeptical of Soviet proposals, proposing to develop confidence-building measures and control over the implementation of decisions taken, while the Soviet Union refused these measures, considering them as interference in internal affairs.
In the second half of the 1950s and the first half of the 1960s. relations have improved Soviet Union with Turkey, Iran. A declaration was signed with Japan in 1956 providing for an end to the state of war and the restoration of diplomatic relations. Bilateral negotiations were held with England and France, and an agreement was concluded with the United States on cooperation in the field of culture, economics, and the exchange of delegations of scientists and cultural figures. In 1959, N.S. Khrushchev visited the United States on his first official visit. The subsequent course of events showed that the Western powers did not seek to develop relations and increase mutual understanding with the Soviet Union, as evidenced by the refusal of the United States to cancel discriminatory measures in trade with the USSR and the breakdown of negotiations between the two countries on financial issues. In May 1960, in the Sverdlovsk region, a Soviet missile shot down an American U-2 reconnaissance aircraft that was photographing military targets. President D. Eisenhower stated that such actions are carried out in accordance with the national interests of the United States. And if necessary, they will be carried out in the future. The tension that arose between the countries led to the cancellation of D. Eisenhower’s visit to the USSR, N.S. Khrushchev’s refusal from the planned meeting at top level in Paris.
At the same time, the positions of the USSR in the Eastern European socialist countries remained unchanged, despite their somewhat greater political independence. However, attempts to go beyond the permitted “liberalization” were suppressed quite harshly. This was most clearly demonstrated by the events in Hungary in 1956 and in the GDR in 1961.
In 1956, anti-communist, anti-Soviet demonstrations began in Hungary. A new government came to power, striving to restore democracy in the Western version, withdraw from the Warsaw Pact Organization and end allied relations with the USSR. The border with Austria was opened, and anti-communist armed groups were created. With the help of Soviet troops, the rebellion was suppressed, the power of the Communist Party and all allied obligations of Hungary were restored.
The events of 1961 in Germany were a serious crisis. West Berlin area Western states used as a base for the work of intelligence services. Many who disagreed with the order in East Germany used West Berlin as a transit point for moving to the West and as comfortable spot for contacts with representatives of Western political forces. In the spring and summer of 1961, the political crisis intensified in the GDR, caused by the fact that Substantial part its population, especially the youth of large cities, began to openly advocate for a change in the country's political system. The GDR government decided to build a wall around West Berlin to stop contacts between “internal and external counter-revolution.” The creation of the Berlin Wall had a negative impact on the development of international relations.
The Berlin crisis was followed by the Cuban missile crisis, which brought the world to the brink of global catastrophe. The Soviet leadership, in response to the US creation of military bases with nuclear missiles reaching Soviet territory and trying to protect the anti-American regime of F. Castro, decided to station troops and missiles with nuclear warheads in Cuba. By October 1962, missiles with a range of over 2 thousand km, capable of hitting targets throughout most of the United States, were secretly delivered to Cuba. Having discovered them, the United States declared a naval and air blockade of Cuba and put its troops on full combat readiness. The USSR and the USA were on the threshold nuclear war. Thanks to the wisdom shown on the part of N.S. Khrushchev and US President J. Kennedy, it was possible to prevent a nuclear disaster and reach a compromise: the USSR removed nuclear missiles from Cuba, the United States guaranteed the security of Cuba and removed medium-range nuclear missiles aimed at the USSR from American military bases in Turkey. This crisis of the Cold War era showed that nuclear missile weapons cannot be an instrument for achieving political goals through military methods.
In the second half of the 1950s - early 1960s. problems arose in relations between the USSR and China. The Chinese leadership did not like the exposure of Stalin's cult of personality, N.S. Khrushchev's cautious criticism of China's economic course, the USSR's refusal to provide China with nuclear weapons, its neutrality during the Indian-Chinese conflict and its restraint in US-Chinese clashes over coastal islands. China no longer wanted to accept the role of the “little brother” in the socialist family and sought to push the USSR out of its leading position. The Soviet leadership could not agree with this, which caused ever-increasing tension.
In the 1950-1960s. many Asian and African colonial countries gained independence. The USSR and the USA tried to have “their people” in the governments of the new states, direct their foreign and domestic policies, and provided economic and military assistance. The main “hot spots” at this time were Southeast Asia and the Middle East. Supporters of communist movements occupied vast areas in Malaysia, Thailand, South Vietnam, and were part of the governments of Indonesia and North Vietnam. The USSR sought to establish diplomatic relations with developing countries; the strongest ties were established with India and Indonesia. If in India the moderate and pragmatic course bore fruit, then the more accelerated Indonesian experiment ended in failure; after the military coup d'etat, the communists there began to be destroyed.
Complex processes also took place in the Middle East. In the late 1940s - early 1950s. Most Arab countries freed themselves from colonial rule. At the same time, since 1948, the state of Israel existed in the region, created in accordance with UN decisions, for which the USA and the USSR voted. The pro-American course of the Israeli government and the anti-imperialist policies of a number of Arab countries were the basis of the conflict between Israel and the Arab countries. Another reason was Jewish and Arab nationalism, which pushed neighboring peoples towards irreconcilable hostility. The USSR supported Arab countries politically, economically, and militarily. In 1956, England, France and Israel, after the nationalization of the Suez Canal by Egypt, began a military operation against this country. The forces of the parties were unequal, it was clear that Egypt would suffer inevitable defeat. At this tragic moment, the decisive role was played by the position of the USSR, which fully armed the Egyptian army, and at the most critical moment made a statement about its readiness to send volunteers to Egypt. The United States showed hesitation, not wanting to intensify the confrontation with the USSR, England, France and Israel withdrew their troops from Egypt. The 1956 war significantly strengthened the USSR's position in the Middle East. From that time on, the influence of the Soviet Union in the Third World countries began to increase, in the early 1960s. The USSR supported new states in Africa that gained independence.
In general, by the mid-1960s. There was a certain stabilization of the post-war world. The opposing systems, led by the USSR and the USA, emerged from major conflicts on the brink of war, gained experience in relationships in the new conditions of the existence of military-political blocs and nuclear weapons, and the birth of numerous independent states from the collapsed colonial system.
Attempts at de-Stalinization.. Soviet political history was largely determined by the personality of the leader located on the Olympus of power. The passing of Stalin meant the beginning of a new stage in the development of the Soviet political system. From the point of view of developing a political course and its implementation, important milestones are June, September 1953, January 1955, February 1956, June 1957, and the adoption of the CPSU Program in 1961.
It was necessary to carry out an “inventory” of the inherited “inheritance” and redistribute power functions between party, state and law enforcement agencies. An important factor changes became a struggle for power between Stalin's successors. First of all, Stalin's successors proclaimed the principle of collective leadership, which meant the desire to prevent clear leadership by one of them. The balance of power in the country's leadership testified to the presence of the greatest political weight in G.M. Malenkov (who was Stalin's formal successor as Chairman of the Council of Ministers), L.P. Beria (who headed the Ministry of Internal Affairs), N.S. Khrushchev (who headed the party apparatus of the Central Committee CPSU).
In the spring and summer of 1953, L.P. Beria made a number of proposals to the government and the Central Committee of the CPSU concerning various spheres of the country's life: to liquidate the GDR and create a united Germany; restore normal relations with Yugoslavia; on his initiative an amnesty of prisoners took place (1 million 184 thousand people were released). The Gulag was transferred to the Ministry of Justice, and all construction departments that were under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Internal Affairs were transferred to the relevant ministries. The efficiency of collective farm production was questioned, etc. These proposals testified to L.P. Beria’s desire to quickly get rid of the most odious manifestations of the existing system. In June 1953, L.P. Beria was arrested. At the Plenum of the Central Committee, he was accused of trying to place the Ministry of Internal Affairs over the party and the state, fabricating false cases against innocent people, intrigues, squabbles, etc., but L.P. Beria was tried and shot “for treason to the Motherland, for organizing an anti-Soviet conspiracy , for committing terrorist acts." A new stage begins in the struggle for power in the ruling elite; its political content was a clash between the party and state apparatuses for a leading place in the management system. After the liquidation of L.P. Beria, N.S. Khrushchev and the party apparatus strengthened their power positions.
Next important point January 1955 appeared in the political struggle, when G.M. Malenkov was released from the post of chairman of the Council of Ministers. In a report at the Plenum of the Central Committee, N.S. Khrushchev expressed the opinion of the “collective leadership” that G.M. Malenkov does not ensure the proper fulfillment of the duties of the chairman of the government, since he does not have sufficient qualities, and is also “very timid and indecisive, and often and has an unprincipled approach to solving many issues.” He was reminded of the “Leningrad affair” and was given political responsibility for the backwardness of agriculture. This was a victory for N.S. Khrushchev, which opened the way for him to unlimited power.
The 20th Congress of the CPSU (February 1956) played an important role in the socio-political life of the country. There, in a special report delivered by N.S. Khrushchev, criticism was made of Stalin’s personality cult. This event had a great resonance in the country and in the world. Essentially, a powerful blow was dealt to the image of the USSR and the society built in it in the eyes of many people abroad, for whom the USSR had previously personified a model of a fair social order. At the same time, the exposure of the cult of personality created new conditions within the country. An impetus was given to the process of emancipation of public consciousness, complicating the spiritual life of society, which was officially called the democratization of socio-political life, and unofficially, called the “thaw”. In Soviet society, the “secret” report caused a mixed reaction: from rejection and condemnation, through tacit approval and support, to recognition of its obvious limitations as criticism of an individual, not a system. The decisions of the 20th Congress were a powerful impulse that accelerated the process of political rehabilitation of the repressed. In total, more than 700 thousand people were rehabilitated before 1961.
An important milestone in N.S. Khrushchev’s struggle for political leadership June 1957 appeared, when members of the Presidium of the CPSU Central Committee V.M. Molotov, G.M. Malenkov, L.M. Kaganovich and others tried to remove the first secretary of the CPSU Central Committee. N.S. Khrushchev was accused of violating the principle of collective leadership, of displaying rudeness and intolerance towards individual members of the Presidium. They said that his cult of personality was growing in the country, that he was inculcating the practice of suppressing the initiative and independence of Soviet bodies, while party organizations were taking on economic functions that were not typical for them, and major miscalculations were noted in the management of agriculture. N.S. Khrushchev's position was becoming threatening. Then, KGB Chairman I.A. Serov and Defense Minister G.K. Zhukov urgently transported members of the Central Committee and supporters of N.S. Khrushchev to Moscow by transport aircraft. The intervention of members of the Central Committee prevented this plan from being realized and led to the strengthening of N.S. Khrushchev’s position as the sole leader, which was formally consolidated in 1958, when he became Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the USSR, retaining the post of First Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee.
In October 1957, G.K. Zhukov lost his post as Minister of Defense. He was accused of trying to reduce the influence of party organizations and political agencies in the armed forces; to encourage the creation of a cult of one’s personality, to exalt one’s own role in victories in the Second World War; in a penchant for adventurism; in lack of partisanship.
Having lost real competitors in the struggle for power, N.S. Khrushchev fully demonstrated the qualities of an authoritarian leader. The culmination of his political career was the XXII Congress of the CPSU (1961). At it, N.S. Khrushchev made all the main reports (Reporting, on the Program, on the Party Charter, with concluding remarks). The Party Program adopted at the CPSU Congress proclaimed the construction of a communist society within the foreseeable historical period. This document intertwined realism and utopianism of the set goals and objectives; it was the fruit of the ideas of Soviet people of the late 1950s - early 1960s. about the world, one’s own country, trends in social development. Soon after the adoption of the Program, the wave of euphoria in society, generated by promises of imminent communist abundance, began to decline due to growing socio-economic difficulties.
N.S. Khrushchev tried to solve the worsening problems with the help of the administrative and organizational factor: changing personnel and creating new management structures. In 1962, party bodies were divided into industrial and rural, which did not suit the party-state nomenklatura. It was united under the sign of eliminating the source of these dangers in the person of N.S. Khrushchev. In October 1964, at a meeting of the Presidium of the CPSU Central Committee, former “devoted” associates of the first secretary presented him with a wide range of accusations of failures and mistakes in domestic and foreign policy and forced N.S. Khrushchev to resign. There was broad opposition to N.S. Khrushchev in the country among a significant part of the peasantry, intelligentsia, state apparatus, party nomenklatura, and in the army. The reasons for the resignation of N.S. Khrushchev lie in the crisis of his own politics. And if many reacted negatively to the removal of G.M. Malenkov and especially G.K. Zhukov, the absolute majority of the population approved the departure of N.S. Khrushchev from the political arena.
Socio-economic reforms. By the end of Stalin's rule, the parameters of the country's socio-economic condition were mixed in results. In industry, post-war reconstruction was largely completed. New large-scale industrial construction was launched, especially in the east of the country, in the Baltic states, the Volga region, and Transcaucasia. In the agricultural sector, as a result of state policy consisting of the withdrawal of the overwhelming share of resources in favor of the industrial sector, a difficult situation for rural residents was observed, the possibilities for solving the grain problem were limited, and there was low technical equipment. In the early 1950s. Only about 20% of the total investment in industry was invested in agriculture. In 1953, only 22% of collective farms were electrified, the majority peasant huts continued to be illuminated by candles, kerosene lamps and even torches.
Stalin's successors understood the need to pursue a socio-economic policy that, while continuing the line of building socialism and communism, would aim at solving pressing human problems: providing food, clothing, housing. Three main directions of modernization of the country were identified. The first was the strengthening of defense capability, which was explained by geopolitical realities: the need to preserve and strengthen the position of the USSR as one of the leading world powers, based on the presence of a powerful military potential. The Ministry of Medium Mechanical Engineering, the flagship of the secret nuclear industry, and the Ministry of General Mechanical Engineering, which supervised work on rocket science and space exploration, were established. The reduction of the ground army and surface fleet was compensated by the creation of nuclear missile weapons and a nuclear submarine fleet. The launch of the first artificial Earth satellite on October 4, 1957 excited all of humanity, but especially the population of the United States, since the end of “overseas invulnerability” was put to an end. Space exploration was carried out in the USSR with the participation of the military and for military purposes. N.S. Khrushchev “played up” the historic space flight of Yu.A. Gagarin in April 1961 from a military point of view. In the summer of 1961 he said: “We don’t have 50- or 100-megaton bombs, we have bombs with a yield of over 100 megatons. We launched Gagarin and Titov into space, but we can replace them with another cargo and send it to any place on Earth.” The measures taken in the field of armaments have led to a significant strengthening of the country's military potential through the introduction of new technologies. However, by the beginning of the 1960s. The United States had quantitative and qualitative superiority in the field of strategic nuclear weapons.
The second priority is the agricultural sector. Here, through the efforts of G.M. Malenkov and N.S. Khrushchev, in the summer and autumn of 1953, a program was outlined to reduce the tax burden, use economic incentives for management, and state assistance to rural areas with equipment and loans. In 1952-1958. State purchase prices increased several times, and the cash income of collective farmers increased. The change in the course of agricultural policy towards the interests of the peasantry made it possible to increase marketable agricultural output by 60% by 1960 compared to 1953. The development of about 33 million hectares of virgin and fallow lands in the east of the country also contributed to the growth of gross agricultural output. An attractive image of a virgin land worker was created - a young, educated man who, overcoming difficulties, begins to build a new state farm - an “agricultural city”. To the virgin lands - in the Trans-Urals, Western Siberia, Altai and Kazakhstan in 1954-1957. 55,924 families resettled. For 1954 - 1955 425 large grain state farms were created in the virgin lands. As a result of such a large-scale action since the mid-1950s. from a third to a half of all bread produced in the country came from virgin crops. But the fears of the skeptics were also justified. In the virgin lands, granaries were not prepared, the transport network remained undeveloped, a large amount of grain was lost, there was not enough repair capacity and machine operators for harvesting, which forced students from other parts of the country, military personnel, and prisoners to be involved in seasonal work every year. Therefore, the cost of virgin grain was higher than in the central regions of the USSR. Solving the grain problem through the development of virgin lands in short time resulted in the desolation of the “old arable” areas of the Non-Black Earth Region. Neglect on the part of the party and state leadership of the recommendations of scientists, underestimation of such dangerous consequences, as soil erosion and dust storms have reduced the efficiency of virgin land development.
A major step in reforming the collective farm system was the reorganization of machine and tractor stations (MTS), carried out in 1958. The order of technical maintenance of collective farms was changed, which became the owners of equipment and could use it more efficiently, and their personnel was replenished by over a million machine operators who transferred from MTS. But payments for equipment, often worn out, led to the withdrawal of significant funds from collective farms. The state retained the material and technical supply of collective farms and orders for collective farm products, which increased the unequal exchange between them.
In the second half of the 1950s. The agricultural course, which was based on the material interest of collective farmers, underwent serious changes. Against the backdrop of the main idea - the movement towards a communist society - personal subsidiary plots seemed to be an annoying “relic of capitalism” and were supposed to disappear in the near future. The infringement of personal subsidiary plots led to the fact that in the early 1960s. A significant part of the collective farmers' livestock was destroyed. During the five years of the attack on the private sector (1956 - 1961), market prices for food jumped by 30 - 40%. As a result, in 1958 - 1964. The size of personal plots on collective and state farms has decreased significantly, and the production of meat and milk on private farms has fallen by 20%.
Characteristic feature Khrushchev's reforms in agriculture there was a belief in a miraculous method that could immediately improve the situation of this industry. Along with virgin soil, such methods included the introduction of corn in all regions of the country, the square-cluster method of planting, the elimination of clear fallows, the introduction of free-stall housing for cows, and separate harvesting of crops. In the early 1960s. The growing inefficiency of the functioning system of agrarian relations in the USSR led to a significant lag of the agricultural sector from the industrial sector, an aggravation of the food problem and the beginning of grain purchases abroad. In 1963, a record amount of gold for the entire post-war period was sold for export from the USSR State Fund - 520.3 tons, of which 372.2 tons went directly to the purchase of food.
The third priority is maintaining the accelerated growth of heavy industry while increasing attention to solving social issues: increasing wages and pensions, increasing the production of consumer goods, including modern household appliances for that time (TVs, refrigerators, washing machines), the deployment of mass housing construction based on new industrial technologies.
The social policy of the post-Stalin leadership contributed to improving the living standards of the country's population. By 1960, the transfer of workers and employees to a 7-hour working day was completed. Increased regularly wage(annually on average by 6%). The issuance of compulsory government bonds has ceased. Pensions for workers and employees were doubled, and all types of tuition fees were abolished. The level of consumption of basic food products has increased significantly: vegetables and fruits - more than 3 times; for dairy products - by 40%; meat - by 50%; fish - almost 2 times. In general, by the end of the 1950s. compared to 1950, the real incomes of workers and employees increased by 60%, and collective farmers - by 90%.
N.S. Khrushchev put forward the slogan “Catch up and overtake America!” specifically in the sphere of consumption. At the end of the 1950s. “scientifically based” standards for the consumption of food and industrial goods were published, indicating the measure of satisfaction of needs that should be strived for. Food consumption standards were based on the United States and were very high, but the target level of consumption of livestock products per capita was never achieved. Some standards for durable consumer goods were later raised because they clearly did not meet the changing needs of the population. Thus, initially ownership of passenger cars was not provided for, due to the fact that N.S. Khrushchev advocated the widespread development of public transport, as well as the development of a car rental network. Washing machines were to be shared by several families. But otherwise, the planned norms did not differ fundamentally from Western consumption models. The following data shows the gap in consumption levels that existed at that time. In the mid-1950s. Almost 100% of US households had refrigerators, 86% had black and white televisions. A few years later, color televisions, freezers, home air conditioners, dishwashers. In the USSR, for example, in the families of mechanical engineers in the Urals, i.e. highly paid category of workers, in 1960 every fourth family had washing machines, and every third family had black-and-white televisions. Almost 60% of Soviet families used radios and sewing machines. In 1958, there were 53 television centers in the USSR, and the number of televisions reached 3 million, whereas back in 1953 there were only 3 television centers in the country, and the number of televisions barely exceeded 200 thousand.
The use of industrial technologies made it possible to provide millions of Soviet people huddled in communal apartments with their own housing. For 1956 - 1960 About 54 million people celebrated housewarmings. (a quarter of the country's population). At the same time, the housing standard itself changed: families began to receive from the state not rooms, but separate, albeit small, apartments. At the same time, the problem of furnishing one’s home with furniture, household appliances, etc. has become more acute.
In the early 1960s, when trade shortages in meat, milk, butter and bread arose, the government made attempts to improve the economy at the expense of workers. Tariff rates in production were reduced by almost a third, and retail food prices have increased by the same amount on average since May 1962, with prices for some food products in high demand almost doubling. The deterioration of the socio-economic situation contributed to the growth of opposition sentiments in the country. Spontaneous protests by workers took place in a number of cities. The largest of them was in June 1962 in Novocherkassk, where the authorities used weapons and 23 people died.
During the reign of N.S. Khrushchev, reforms were carried out in the sphere of government of the country. The over-centralized, militarized economy of the country during the Stalin era gave rise to a system consisting of branched sectoral ministries that managed industrial enterprises, reporting numerous indicators to them: the number of employees, standards for increasing labor productivity, etc. The ministries determined the suppliers of raw materials for enterprises and the recipients of their products. In 1957, on the initiative of N.S. Khrushchev, the previous order of industrial management was changed. The key link became the Councils of the National Economy of economic administrative regions (sovnarkhozes): a territory united by the unity of economic management and a collegial management body that led the comprehensive development of industry, to which industrial and construction companies, economic institutions located in this area. 70 economic councils were created in the RSFSR, 11 in Ukraine, 9 in Kazakhstan, 4 in Uzbekistan, and one each in the other union republics. Centralized control was retained only for the most knowledge-intensive and important branches of the military industry. The consequences of the creation of economic councils were: a reduction in the costs of transporting raw materials and products, strengthening cooperation ties between enterprises located on the same territory, the destruction of the usual management vertical of people's commissariats-ministries, and expanding opportunities for regional party and economic elites.
N.S. Khrushchev’s faith in the advantages of socialism, in the possibility of catching up and surpassing capitalism in the most important economic indicators, was strengthened not only by ideology, but also by real achievements. The growth of national income in the USSR from 1950 to 1960 was 265%, while in the USA it was only 134%. From 1954 to 1964, electricity production increased almost 5 times, oil production - 3.5 times, steel production - 2 times. By the beginning of the 1960s. A powerful industrial and scientific potential was created in the country. More than 400 industries operated on the territory of the RSFSR alone. The country went into space and mastered the latest military technologies. According to UNESCO, in 1960 the USSR shared 2nd - 3rd place in the world in terms of the country's intellectual potential. At the same time, the Soviet economy was poorly balanced and required a constant increase in production resources for its growth. The heavy and raw materials industries, as well as the military-industrial complex, developed successfully, which could not be said about the civil engineering industries, which were practically devoid of influx latest technologies and therefore doomed to fall behind. The rate of economic growth has been falling since the early 1960s. has become a reality. This circumstance, among others, forced N.S. Khrushchev from the idea of reorganizing management to turn to the idea of economic reform, which began to be implemented in the mid-1960s. after his resignation.
"Thaw" in the sphere of culture. In the culture and spiritual life of Soviet society, a “thaw” began to manifest itself soon after Stalin’s death, even before the 20th Congress of the CPSU. The renewal affected almost all types of art and forms of social life, but these processes were most clearly manifested in literature. In the works of I. Erenburg “The Thaw”, V. Panova “Seasons”, F. Panferov “Mother Volga River”, V. Dudintsev “Not by Bread Alone”, D. Granin “Seekers” and other authors sought to show a non-ideal , and real life with its problems and contradictions, they looked for the origins and causes of the formation of social problems and vices.
After the 20th Congress of the CPSU, which gave new impetus to the renewal process, the pressure of party ideology on all types of art, including music, painting and cinematography, weakened, and they began to develop more freely. At the same time, an example of the inconsistency of the “thaw” policy was the attitude of the authorities towards B.L. Pasternak and A.I. Solzhenitsyn. In the novel “Doctor Zhivago,” Pasternak assessed the events of the October Revolution of 1917 and the life of society at that time not from a class (party) point of view, but from a universal human point of view, going beyond what was permitted by the party. Therefore, the author was unable to publish Doctor Zhivago in the USSR and decided to publish it in the West. For publishing a novel banned in the USSR and receiving the Nobel Prize, he was expelled from the Writers' Union and, fearing deportation from the country, refused the Nobel Prize. At first, Khrushchev, interested in the fight against Stalin’s legacy, treated A.I. Solzhenitsyn favorably and allowed him to publish “Matryonin’s Dvor” and “One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich” in Soviet publishing houses. Then systematic criticism began for “underestimation of the leading role of the party”, “formalism”, “lack of ideas”, “ideological dubiousness” not only of Solzhenitsyn, but also of other writers and poets (A. Voznesensky, D. Granin, V. Dudintsev, K. Paustovsky ), sculptors, artists, directors (E. Neizvestny, R. Falk, M. Khutsiev), philosophers, historians. At the same time, works were created that received the approval of the authorities and recognition of the people (“The Fate of a Man” by M. Sholokhov, “Silence” by Yu. Bondarev, the films “The Cranes Are Flying” by M. Kalatozov, “Clear Sky” by G. Chukhrai). In evaluating works of literature and art, the authorities adhered to the principle of the “golden mean”, i.e. refusal equally from the varnishing of Soviet reality and its denigration, i.e. Images are from the negative side only.
After the 20th Congress of the CPSU, Soviet society ceased to be politically and ideologically monolithic, people could more freely discuss issues of social and cultural life. The emergence of a relatively independent and democratic direction in culture began, as opposed to the official ideological approach, in which socialist realism was considered the only acceptable one.
Control questions
1.What changes occurred in the foreign policy of the USSR in the post-Stalin period?
2.Name priority areas modernization of the socio-economic sphere in 1953-1964.
3. How successfully did the USSR economy develop during the Khrushchev years and what influence did the position of the country’s leader have on it?
4.What stages did the political system go through in its development during the Khrushchev decade?
5.Name the manifestations of the contradictory nature of the Khrushchev “thaw” in the sphere of culture.
Literature
Aksyutin Yu.V. Khrushchev's “thaw” and public sentiment in the USSR in 1953-1964. M., 2010.
Daniels R.V. The rise and fall of communism in Russia. M., 2011.
Zubok V.M. Failed Empire: The Soviet Union in the Cold War from Stalin to Gorbachev. M., 2011
Pyzhikov A.V. Khrushchev’s “thaw”. M., 2002
Tertyshny A.T., Trofimov A.V. Russia: images of the past and meanings of the present. Ekaterinburg, 2012.
The release of political prisoners, the liquidation of the Gulag, the weakening of totalitarian power, the emergence of some freedom of speech, the relative liberalization of political and social life, openness to the Western world, greater freedom of creative activity. The name is associated with the tenure of the First Secretary of the Central Committee of the CPSU Nikita Khrushchev (1953-1964).
The word “thaw” is associated with the story of the same name by Ilya Ehrenburg [ ] .
Encyclopedic YouTube
1 / 5
✪ “Thaw” in the USSR: features of the economic and political development of the USSR in the 1950-1960s.
✪ USSR in 1953 - 1965
✪ Hour of Truth - Khrushchev's "Thaw" - Domestic Policy
✪ USSR in 1953-1964 Political development | History of Russia #41 | Info lesson
✪ "THAW" in the USSR. Webinarium. OGE History - 2018
Subtitles
Story
The starting point of the “Khrushchev Thaw” was the death of Stalin in 1953. The “thaw” also includes a short period (1953-1955), when Georgy Malenkov was in charge of the country and major criminal cases were closed (“Leningrad case”, “Doctors case”), and an amnesty was given to those convicted of minor crimes. During these years, prisoner uprisings broke out in the Gulag system: Norilsk, Vorkuta, Kengir, etc. [ ] .
De-Stalinization
With Khrushchev strengthening in power, the “thaw” began to be associated with the debunking of Stalin’s personality cult. At the same time, in 1953-1956, Stalin still continued to be officially revered in the USSR as a great leader; during that period, in portraits he was often depicted together with Lenin. At the 20th Congress of the CPSU in 1956, Khrushchev made a report “On the cult of personality and its consequences,” in which Stalin’s cult of personality and Stalin’s repressions were criticized, and in the foreign policy of the USSR a course towards “peaceful coexistence” with the capitalist world was proclaimed. Khrushchev also began a rapprochement with Yugoslavia, relations with which had been severed under Stalin [ ] .
In general, the new course was supported at the top of the CPSU and corresponded to the interests of the nomenklatura, since previously even the most prominent party leaders who fell into disgrace had to fear for their lives. Many surviving political prisoners in the USSR and socialist countries were released and rehabilitated. Since 1953, commissions for verification of cases and rehabilitation have been formed. The majority of peoples deported in the 1930s and 1940s were allowed to return to their homeland.
Labor legislation was also relaxed, in particular, on April 25, 1956, the Supreme Soviet of the USSR approved a decree of its presidium abolishing judicial liability for unauthorized departure from enterprises and institutions, as well as for absenteeism without a valid reason and being late for work.
Tens of thousands of German and Japanese prisoners of war were sent home. In some countries, relatively liberal leaders came to power, such as Imre Nagy in Hungary. An agreement was reached on the state neutrality of Austria and the withdrawal of all occupation forces from it. In 1955, Khrushchev met in Geneva with US President Dwight Eisenhower and the heads of government of Great Britain and France [ ] .
At the same time, de-Stalinization had an extremely negative impact on relations with Maoist China. The Chinese Communist Party condemned de-Stalinization as revisionism.
On the night of October 31 to November 1, 1961, Stalin’s body was taken out of the Mausoleum and reburied near the Kremlin wall.
Under Khrushchev, Stalin was treated neutrally and positively. In all Soviet publications of the Khrushchev Thaw, Stalin was called a prominent party figure, a staunch revolutionary and a major theoretician of the party, who united the party during a period of difficult trials. But at the same time, all publications of that time wrote that Stalin had his shortcomings and that in the last years of his life he made major mistakes and excesses.
Limits and contradictions of the Thaw
The thaw period did not last long. Already with the suppression of the Hungarian uprising of 1956, clear boundaries openness policy. The party leadership was frightened by the fact that liberalization of the regime in Hungary led to open anti-communist protests and violence; accordingly, liberalization of the regime in the USSR could lead to the same consequences [ ] .
A direct consequence of this letter was a significant increase in 1957 in the number of people convicted of “counter-revolutionary crimes” (2948 people, which is 4 times more than in 1956). Students were expelled from institutes for making critical statements.
During the period 1953-1964 the following events occurred:
- 1953 - mass protests in the GDR; in 1956 - in Poland.
- - the pro-Stalinist protest of Georgian youth in Tbilisi was suppressed.
- - prosecution of Boris Pasternak for publishing the novel in Italy.
- - mass unrest in Grozny was suppressed.
- In the 1960s, Nikolaev dockers, during interruptions in the supply of bread, refused to ship grain to Cuba.
- - in violation of the current legislation, currency traders Rokotov and Faibishenko were shot (Case of Rokotov-Faibishenko-Yakovlev).
- - the workers' protest in Novocherkassk was suppressed with the use of weapons.
- - Joseph Brodsky was arrested. The trial of the poet became one of the factors in the emergence of the human rights movement in the USSR.
"Thaw" in art
During the period of de-Stalinization, censorship noticeably weakened, primarily in literature, cinema and other forms of art, where a more critical coverage of reality became possible. The “first poetic bestseller” of the “thaw” was a collection of poems by Leonid Martynov (Poems. M., Molodaya Gvardiya, 1955). The main platform for supporters of the “thaw” was the literary magazine “New World”. Some works of this period became famous abroad, including Vladimir Dudintsev’s novel “Not by Bread Alone” and Alexander Solzhenitsyn’s story “One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich.” In 1957, Boris Pasternak's novel Doctor Zhivago was published in Milan. Other significant [ ] Representatives of the “Thaw” period were writers and poets Viktor Astafiev, Vladimir Tendryakov, Bella Akhmadulina, Robert Rozhdestvensky, Andrei Voznesensky, Evgeniy Yevtushenko.
There was a sharp increase in film production. Grigory Chukhrai was the first in cinema to touch upon the theme of de-Stalinization and the “thaw” in the film “Clear Sky” (1963). The main film directors of this period were Marlen Khutsiev, Mikhail Romm, Georgy Danelia, Eldar Ryazanov, Leonid Gaidai. The films “Carnival Night”, “Ilyich’s Outpost”, “Spring on Zarechnaya Street”, “Idiot”, “I’m Walking in Moscow”, “Amphibious Man”, “Welcome, or No Trespassing” became an important cultural event. " and other [ ] .
In 1955-1964, television broadcasts were distributed throughout most of the country. Television studios opened in all capitals of the union republics and in many regional centers.
Thaw in architecture
The new face of state security agencies
The Khrushchev era was a time of transformation of the Soviet security agencies, which was complicated by the resonance caused by the Khrushchev report of 1956, which condemned the role of the special services in the Great Terror. At that time, the word “chekist” lost official approval, and its very mention could cause sharp reproaches. However, soon, by the time Andropov was appointed to the post of chairman of the KGB in 1967, it was rehabilitated: it was during the Khrushchev era that the term “chekist” was cleared, and the reputation and prestige of the secret service was gradually restored. The rehabilitation of the Chekists included the creation of a new series of associations that were supposed to symbolize a break with the Stalinist past: the term “Chekist” received a new birth and acquired new content. As Sakharov would later say, the KGB “became more “civilized”, acquired a face, albeit not entirely human, but in any case no longer a tiger’s.”
Khrushchev's reign was marked by the revival and recreation of veneration of Dzerzhinsky. In addition to the statue on Lubyanka, unveiled in 1958, Dzerzhinsky was commemorated in the late 1950s. throughout the Soviet Union. Untainted by his participation in the Great Terror, Dzerzhinsky was supposed to symbolize the purity of the origins of Soviet Chekism. In the press of that time, there was a noticeable desire to separate Dzerzhinsky’s legacy from the activities of the NKVD, when, according to the first KGB chairman Serov, the secret apparatus was filled with “provocateurs” and “careerists.” The gradual official restoration of trust in the state security organs in the Khrushchev era relied on strengthening the continuity between the KGB and Dzerzhinsky's Cheka, while the Great Terror was portrayed as a departure from the original KGB ideals - a clear historical boundary was drawn between the Cheka and the NKVD.
Khrushchev, who paid great attention to the Komsomol and relied “on youth,” in 1958 appointed the young 40-year-old Shelepin, a non-cheka officer who had previously held leadership positions in the Komsomol, to the post of KGB chairman. This choice was consistent with the new image of the KGB and responded to the desire to create a strong association with the forces of renewal and revival. During the personnel changes that began in 1959, the total number of KGB personnel was reduced, but new security officers were also recruited, drawn mainly from the Komsomol. The image of the security officer in the cinema also changed: instead of people in leather jackets since the early 1960s. young, neat heroes in formal suits began to appear on the screens; they were now respected members of society, fully integrated into the Soviet state system, representatives of one of the state institutions. The increased level of education of security officers was emphasized; Thus, in the Leningradskaya Pravda newspaper it was noted: “today the absolute majority of employees of the State Security Committee have higher education, many own one or more foreign languages", while in 1921 1.3% of security officers had higher education.
Selected writers, directors and historians were given access to earlier On October 16, 1958, the Council of Ministers of the USSR adopted the Resolutions “On Monasteries in the USSR” and “On Raising Taxes on the Income of Diocesan Enterprises and Monasteries.”
On April 21, 1960, the new chairman of the Council for the Affairs of the Russian Orthodox Church, Vladimir Kuroyedov, who was appointed in February of the same year, in his report at the All-Union Meeting of Commissioners of the Council, characterized the work of its previous leadership as follows: “The main mistake of the Council for the Affairs of the Orthodox Church was that it inconsistently pursued the line party and state in relation to the church and often slipped into positions serving church organizations. Taking a defensive position in relation to the church, the council pursued a line not to combat violations of the legislation on cults by the clergy, but to protect church interests.” (1976) there was a neutral article about him. In 1979, several articles were published on the occasion of Stalin's 100th birthday, but no special celebrations were held.
Mass political repressions, however, were not resumed, and Khrushchev, deprived of power, retired and even remained a member of the party. Shortly before this, Khrushchev himself criticized the concept of “thaw” and even called Ehrenburg, who invented it, a “swindler.”
A number of researchers believe that the thaw finally ended in 1968 after the suppression of the Prague Spring.
With the end of the Thaw, criticism of Soviet reality began to spread only through unofficial channels, such as Samizdat.
Mass riots in the USSR
- On June 10-11, 1957, an emergency occurred in the city of Podolsk, Moscow region. The actions of a group of citizens who spread rumors that police officers killed the detained driver. The size of the “group of drunken citizens” is 3 thousand people. 9 instigators were brought to justice.
- August 23-31, 1958, the city of Grozny. Reasons: the murder of a Russian guy against the backdrop of heightened interethnic tensions. The crime caused a wide public outcry, and spontaneous protests grew into a large-scale political uprising, to suppress which troops had to be sent into the city. See Mass riots in Grozny (1958).
- January 15, 1961, city of Krasnodar. Reasons: the actions of a group of drunken citizens who spread rumors about the beating of a serviceman when he was detained by a patrol for violating the wearing of his uniform. Number of participants - 1300 people. Firearms were used and one person was killed. 24 people were brought to criminal responsibility. See Anti-Soviet rebellion in Krasnodar (1961).
- On June 25, 1961, in the city of Biysk, Altai Territory, 500 people took part in mass riots. They stood up for a drunk who the police wanted to arrest at the central market. The drunken citizen resisted the public order officers during his arrest. There was a fight involving weapons. One person was killed, one was injured, 15 were prosecuted.
- June 30, 1961 in the city of Murom Vladimir region over 1.5 thousand workers of the local plant named after Ordzhonikidze almost destroyed the sobering station, in which one of the workers of the enterprise, taken there by the police, died. Law enforcement officers used weapons, two workers were injured, and 12 men were brought to justice.
- On July 23, 1961, 1,200 people took to the streets of the city of Aleksandrov, Vladimir Region, and moved to the city police department to rescue their two detained comrades. The police used weapons, as a result of which four were killed, 11 were wounded, and 20 people were put in the dock.
- September 15-16, 1961 - street riots in the North Ossetian city of Beslan. The number of rioters was 700 people. The riot arose due to an attempt by the police to detain five people who were drunk in a public place. Armed resistance was provided to the law enforcement officers. One was killed, seven were put on trial.
- June 1-2, 1962, Novocherkassk, Rostov region. 4 thousand workers of the electric locomotive plant, dissatisfied with the actions of the administration in explaining the reasons for the increase in retail prices for meat and milk, went out to protest. The protesting workers were dispersed with the help of troops. 23 people were killed, 70 were injured. 132 instigators were brought to criminal responsibility, seven of whom were later shot. See Novocherkassk execution.
- June 16-18, 1963, the city of Krivoy Rog, Dnepropetrovsk region. About 600 people took part in the performance. The reason was resistance to police officers by a drunken serviceman during his arrest and the actions of a group of people. Four killed, 15 wounded, 41 brought to justice.
- November 7, 1963, Sumgayit city. More than 800 people came to the defense of the demonstrators who marched with photographs of Stalin. The police and vigilantes tried to take away the unauthorized portraits. Weapons were used. One demonstrator was injured, six sat in the dock. See Riots in Sumgayit (1963).
- On April 16, 1964, in Bronnitsy near Moscow, about 300 people destroyed a bullpen, where a city resident died from beatings. The police provoked popular outrage with their unauthorized actions. No weapons were used, there were no killed or wounded. 8 people were brought to criminal responsibility.
55. Khrushchev’s “thaw”.
The Khrushchev Thaw period is the conventional name for a period in history that lasted from the mid-1950s to the mid-1960s. A feature of the period was a partial retreat from the totalitarian policies of the Stalin era. The Khrushchev Thaw is the first attempt to understand the consequences of the Stalinist regime, which revealed the features of the socio-political policy of the Stalin era. The main event of this period is considered to be the 20th Congress of the CPSU, which criticized and condemned Stalin’s personality cult and criticized the implementation of repressive policies. February 1956 marked the beginning of a new era, which aimed to change social and political life, change the domestic and foreign policies of the state.
Events of the Khrushchev Thaw
The period of the Khrushchev Thaw is characterized by the following events:
The process of rehabilitation of victims of repression began, the innocently convicted population was granted amnesty, and relatives of “enemies of the people” became innocent.
The republics of the USSR received more political and legal rights.
The year 1957 was marked by the return of Chechens and Balkars to their lands, from which they were evicted during Stalin's time due to accusations of treason. But such a decision did not apply to the Volga Germans and Crimean Tatars.
Also, 1957 is famous for the International Festival of Youth and Students, which in turn speaks of the “opening of the Iron Curtain” and the easing of censorship.
The result of these processes is the emergence of new public organizations. Trade union bodies are undergoing reorganization: the staff of the top level of the trade union system has been reduced, and the rights of primary organizations have been expanded.
Passports were issued to people living in villages and collective farms.
Rapid development of light industry and agriculture.
Active construction of cities.
Improving the standard of living of the population.
One of the main achievements of the policy of 1953–1964. there was the implementation of social reforms, which included solving the issue of pensions, increasing incomes of the population, solving the housing problem, and introducing a five-day week. The period of the Khrushchev Thaw was a difficult time in the history of the Soviet state. In such a short time (10 years), many transformations and innovations have been carried out. The most important achievement was the exposure of the crimes of the Stalinist system, the population discovered the consequences of totalitarianism.
So, the policy of the Khrushchev Thaw was superficial and did not affect the foundations of the totalitarian system. The dominant one-party system was preserved using the ideas of Marxism-Leninism. Mikhail Sergeevich Khrushchev did not intend to carry out complete de-Stalinization, because it meant admitting his own crimes. And since it was not possible to completely renounce Stalin’s time, Khrushchev’s transformations did not take root for long. In 1964, a conspiracy against Khrushchev matured, and from this period a new era in the history of the Soviet Union began.
56. Confrontation of two world systems in the 60-80s of the XX century. Collapse of the colonial system, arms race.
The arms race was voluntarily suspended by the mid-60s.
A number of treaties were concluded limiting the accumulation of weapons. Such
such as the Atmospheric Test Ban Treaty, in
outer space and submarines (08/05/1963), Treaty on
non-proliferation of nuclear weapons, creation of nuclear-free zones (1968),
agreement on SALT 1 (limitation and reduction of strategic weapons)
(1972), Convention on the Prohibition of Development, Production and Stockpiling
stockpiles of bacteriological and toxin weapons and their destruction
(1972) and many others. Another “front” of the Cold War was...
Since achieving strategic parity (early sixties
years) the military component of the arms race is gradually being pushed back to
background, while on stage the struggle for influence in the countries of the third is played out
peace. The term itself was introduced into use due to the increasing influence
non-aligned countries that have not openly joined one of the
warring parties. If at first, the very fact of confrontation
two powerful systems on the world map led to landslide decolonization
(the period of liberation of Africa), then in a later period a circle was formed
states openly and very effectively using their political choice
orientation towards one or another superpower. To a certain extent it is possible here
include the countries of so-called Arab socialism, which decided at the expense of the USSR
their specific narrow national tasks. (1, p.298)
The Cold War was fought not only in politics, but also in
culture, sports. For example, the USA and many Western European countries
boycotted the 1980 Olympic Games in Moscow. In response, athletes from countries
Eastern Europeans boycotted the next Olympics in Los Angeles in 1984
year. The Cold War was widely reflected in cinema, and
Propaganda films were made by both sides. In the USA it is: “Red Dawn”,
"America", "Rimbaud, First Blood, Part II", "Iron Eagle", "Invasion of
USA". In the USSR they filmed: “Night Without Mercy”, “Neutral Waters”, “Incident in
square 36 – 80”, “Solo sailing” and many others. Despite,
that the films are completely different, with different degrees of talent in them,
it showed how bad “they” are and what good guys serve in our army.
A unique and very accurate manifestation of the Cold War in art
reflected in a line from a popular song “and even in the field of ballet, we
ahead of the rest..."
It is quite obvious that the enormous costs incurred
superpowers could not continue indefinitely, and as a result the confrontation
the two systems were decided in the economic sphere. It is this component
turned out to be decisive in the end. More efficient Western economies
made it possible not only to maintain military and political parity, but also
satisfy the growing needs of modern man, which, due to
She knew how to competently manipulate purely market economic mechanisms. IN
at the same time heavyweight, focused only on the production of weapons
and means of production, the economy of the USSR, could not, and did not intend to
compete in this area with the West. Ultimately, this affected
political level, the USSR began to lose the fight not only for influence in
third world countries, but also for influence within the socialist
Commonwealth.
2.2. The international position of the USSR from the mid-60s to the early 80s.
By the mid-60s. compared with the first post-war years, the world
found himself in a significantly changed situation. The then-identified
the contradictions between the allies in the anti-Hitler coalition have now spilled over
into a severe contradiction between two established socio-political systems.
Eastern Europe was under complete control of the USSR, while Western Europe was
in a strong military-political and economic alliance with the United States. "Cold War"
was in full swing. The main object of the struggle between “socialism” and “capitalism”
were the countries of the “third world”, formed on the ruins of the world
colonial system. The USSR and the USA, the main military forces behind them
political blocs NATO and the Warsaw Pact Organization avoided direct
military confrontation. However, competition for influence in developing
countries remained very acute, and often led to local wars
conflicts.
The competition between the two systems also developed in the economic sphere,
Moreover, in the 60s - 80s it became more and more strict. The West had
it had a clear advantage: the starting positions were more profitable, and in the USA in
During the Second World War, economic potential increased significantly. More
The system of cooperation of developed countries was also perfect, while in
The “socialist bloc” included, in addition to the USSR, countries that played
insignificant role in the world economy, many of which suffered huge
damage during the war. The protracted formation of the mechanism of international
division of labor within the framework of CMEA interfered with the coordination of national economic
plans and implementation of joint projects. As a result, already in the mid-80s
s in Western Europe, the level of international division of labor turned out to be
an order of magnitude higher than in Eastern. A major step forward in the integration of countries
The CMEA was adopted in 1971 as a comprehensive program for further deepening
and improving cooperation, designed for 15-20 years. Most
large-scale joint economic projects were construction
the Druzhba oil pipeline and the Soyuz gas pipeline, the participation of allied countries in
development of raw materials resources of Siberia and Central Asia, construction
industrial enterprises in different countries. The Soviet Union put in
Eastern European countries in 1965 8.3 million tons of oil, in 1975 - about
50 million, and by the beginning of the 80s - 508 million tons. Soviet oil prices were
significantly lower than world prices, since the USSR assumed an obligation
supplies of raw materials at lower prices.
Cooperation was actively developing within the framework of the Warsaw
Agreement (OVD). Almost every year in the 1980s general maneuvers were carried out, in
mainly on the territory of the USSR, Poland and the GDR.
Partial reforms of the “Soviet model of socialism” in none of the countries
Eastern European bloc did not lead to a qualitative increase in efficiency
production. (4, p.334)
The reaction to the crisis of the “Soviet model of socialism” in the countries of Eastern
Europe and the events of the “Czechoslovak Spring” of 1968, the so-called
"Brezhnev Doctrine". Its main content was the “theory of limited
sovereignty" of socialist countries. She was proclaimed by the General
Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee at the V Congress of the Polish United Workers' Party in
November 1968. Her nomination testified to the great attention
which was paid to foreign policy in the late 60s - early 70s.
The Brezhnev Doctrine recognized the presence of weak links in
socialist front, the possibility of restoring capitalism due to
objective difficulties and errors of a subjective nature, the likelihood of war
with the imperialist encirclement, the extreme nature of such an action as a military one
assistance to a friendly country in the defense of socialist sovereignty. L.
Brezhnev emphasized that the sovereignty of a socialist state is
the common heritage of all Marxist-Leninists: “When a threat arises to the cause
socialism in one country, a threat to the security of socialist
community as a whole - this is no longer just a problem for the people of a given
country, but also a common problem, a concern of all socialist countries.”
The policy of "non-interference", in his opinion, was directly contrary to the interests of
defense of brotherly states. In order not to give in, not to give up
bourgeoisie not a grain of what has been won, not to allow a retreat from Marxism-
Leninism requires firmly adhering to the “general laws
socialist construction."
The term “doctrine” as a system of attitudes did not take root in Soviet
foreign policy lexicon, it is not in any official party or
state document. But the existence of the “Brezhnev Doctrine” will never
was refuted by the political leaders of the USSR, since it expanded
proletarian internationalism." At the same time, the “Brezhnev Doctrine”
expressed a policy aimed at consolidating the territorial
government structure in Europe in the post-war period.
Attempts at people's democratic reforms were suppressed both from outside
(the introduction of troops of the Warsaw Pact countries into Czechoslovakia in 1968), and
from within (the Solidarity movement in 1980-1981 and its ban with the introduction
military rule in Poland).
The Chinese version of the reforms of the 50-60s led to tough
confrontation between the USSR and China. In 1969, on the Soviet-Chinese border there were
armed clashes (in the area of Damansky Island, etc.). Only after death
Mao Zedong in 1976 and the death of Brezhnev in 1982, the relationship between the two
countries have returned to normal. To the Maoist trend in the period after the Prague
communist parties, priority of national values, denial of “dictatorship
proletariat" and the establishment of democratic mechanisms for coming to power and
mainly in those third world countries that received military
financial and technical assistance THE USSR. For the Soviet Union it was still
one item of huge expenses to the detriment of one’s own economic and
social programs.57. DEVELOPMENT OF THE WORLD ECONOMY for 1945-1991. The dominant role of the USA. Scientific and technological progress and its influence on the course of world social development
On the evening of March 5, 1953, after several days of sudden illness, I.V. died. Stalin. In the last hours of his life, the leader’s inner circle shared power, trying to legitimize their position and revise the decisions of the 19th Congress of the CPSU. The head of the government was G.M. Malenkov. L.P. Beria received the post of Minister of Internal Affairs, which included the Ministry of State Security. N.S. Khrushchev remained Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee. The “disgraced” Mikoyan and Molotov regained their positions. To this day, there are different versions about Stalin’s illness and death: natural death, murder, deliberate delay in calling doctors. It is clear that Stalin's death was beneficial to many of those around him.
The struggle for power in the spring-summer of 1953 was associated with determining the country's development strategy. Numerous problems required solutions. The country could not maintain a huge army, have 2.5 million prisoners, spend money on “great construction projects,” continue to exploit the peasantry, incite conflicts around the world, and create new enemies. The instability of the ruling layer and threats of repression worsened the controllability of the state. All members of the political leadership understood the need for change. But everyone determined the priorities and depth of the inevitable changes in their own way. The first ideologists of the reforms were Beria and Malenkov. Since June 1953, Khrushchev became a supporter of reforms. A more conservative position was taken by Molotov, Kaganovich and Voroshilov.
At the initiative of Beria, on March 27, 1953, an amnesty decree was adopted, according to which about 1 million people sentenced to up to 5 years were released: those who were late for work and truants, women with children under 10 years old, the elderly, etc. Contrary to popular belief, the amnesty did not apply to murderers and bandits, but it did not affect political prisoners either. This action (more than a third of prisoners who had acquired criminal experience in the camps and were not equipped in the everyday sense were released) caused a wave of crime in the cities.
At the beginning of April 1953, the “doctors’ case” was terminated. The official report spoke for the first time about the responsibility of Ministry of Internal Affairs employees who used “prohibited interrogation methods.” Soon, those convicted in other post-war political trials (“Mingrelian case”, “Aviators’ case”) were released. In June 1953, Beria submitted to the Presidium of the CPSU Central Committee a proposal to limit the rights of the Special Meeting under the USSR Ministry of Internal Affairs. Steps were taken to reform the Gulag system “due to economic inefficiency”; a number of enterprises were transferred to line ministries.
Beria's initiatives went beyond the competence of the Ministry of Internal Affairs. He advocated changing the personnel policy in the republics, proposing, in particular, broad promotion of national personnel to the leadership. Beria insisted on normalizing relations with Yugoslavia, as well as abandoning the costly construction of socialism in the GDR and creating a neutral, united Germany. The phenomenon of Beria in the history of the USSR has not yet been fully explored. He gained a reputation as a villain and executioner. It seems that such an assessment suffers from simplicity.
Of course, Beria is responsible for crimes committed by the authorities, but to the same extent as his comrades Malenkov, Molotov, Kaganovich, Voroshilov, Khrushchev and others. Beria, by virtue of his position, was the most informed person in the leadership, knowing better than anyone the “pain points” of the system, all the information about what the population of the country was primarily opposed to flowed to him through the security agencies. Beria's activity aroused fears among other members of the political leadership of his “sworn friends.”
Beria was feared and hated by the army leadership. The local nomenklatura was controlled by the Ministry of Internal Affairs, which was not responsible for anything, but interfered in everything. His comrades began to suspect Beria of preparing his own dictatorship. Thus, Beria became a symbol of threat. He was feared and hated by all major political forces. By preliminary agreement between Malenkov, Khrushchev and Defense Minister Bulganin, on June 26, 1953, at a meeting of the Presidium of the Council of Ministers, Beria was arrested. The performers of the “operation” were Marshal Zhukov, commander of the Moscow Military District Moskalenko and several officers.
At the beginning of July 1953, a plenum of the Central Committee was held, at which the image of a state criminal, a spy of “international imperialism”, a conspirator, “an enemy who wanted to restore power for the restoration of capitalism” was created. From now on, Beria becomes, according to modern researcher R.G. Pihoi, “a kind of drain of the history of the party, the source of everything that did not correspond to the canonized ideas about the role of the party.” Thus, a specific “political intriguer” was declared guilty of everything, and not the system of power, not Stalin. In December 1953, at a closed meeting of the Supreme Court of the USSR, Beria and his closest assistants were sentenced to death for treason.
The beginning of the "thaw".
The “Beria case” acquired a powerful public resonance, raising hopes for a change in the political atmosphere in the country. An important result of the plenum of the CPSU Central Committee was the confirmation of the principle of party leadership. The logical result was the introduction at the September 1953 plenum of the post of First Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee, which Khrushchev received. It was he who gradually began to seize the initiative for transformations, later called the “Khrushchev Thaw.”
Time from late 1953 to early 1955. characterized by a power struggle between Khrushchev and Malenkov. Their rivalry unfolded against the backdrop of determining the country's economic development strategy. Malenkov intended to change priorities in economic development by increasing specific gravity production of consumer goods. Khrushchev insisted on maintaining the previous Stalinist course on the primary development of the heavy defense industry. A particularly acute situation arose in agriculture, which had to be brought out of a state of complete devastation.
In August 1953, at a session of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR, Malenkov announced a reduction in taxes from peasants and the provision of basic social rights to peasants (primarily the partial issuance of passports). The new agricultural policy was finally formulated at the September (1953) plenum. It was directly stated about the dire situation in the countryside. Khrushchev announced a significant increase in government purchase prices for agricultural products, the cancellation of collective farm debt, and the need to increase investment in the agricultural sector of the economy.
These measures made it possible to somewhat improve the food situation, stimulated the development of private production of meat, milk, and vegetables, and made life easier for millions of citizens of the USSR. In 1954, to solve the grain problem, the development of virgin and fallow lands began in Western Siberia and Kazakhstan.
The next step was the selective rehabilitation of victims of Stalin's terror. In April 1954, those convicted in the so-called “Leningrad case” were rehabilitated. During 1953-1955 All major political cases of the post-war period were reviewed, extrajudicial bodies were abolished, their rights were restored and prosecutorial supervision was strengthened, etc. But the political processes of the 1930s were practically not revised.
In addition, rehabilitation was very slow. In 1954-1955 Only 88 thousand prisoners were released. At this rate, it would take decades to process millions of applications. Strikes and uprisings began in the camps themselves. One of the largest was the uprising in Kengir (Kazakhstan) in the spring and summer of 1954 under the slogan “Long live the Soviet Constitution!” The uprising lasted 42 days and was suppressed only with the help of tanks and infantry.
The “undercover” struggle between Khrushchev and Malenkov ended in victory for the former. In February 1955, a session of the Supreme Council relieved Malenkov from the post of head of government. At the previous January (1955) plenum of the CPSU Central Committee, Malenkov was blamed for his economic and foreign policy views (for example, discussions about the possible death of humanity in a nuclear war). A weighty argument was his involvement in the repressions.
He was for the first time publicly accused of collaborating with Beria, of being responsible for the “Leningrad affair” and a number of other political processes of the 40s and early 50s. The consequence of this was new rehabilitations. During 1955-1956 The topic of repression and attitude towards Stalin is gradually becoming the main one in society. Not only the fate of the party and political leadership, but also the party’s place in the country’s political system depended on its decision.
Considering the history of the first post-Stalin decade, we should especially note the importance XX Congress of the CPSU. It became a turning point in the development of Soviet society and radically changed the situation in the international communist movement thanks to Khrushchev’s secret report “On the cult of personality and its consequences,” read on February 25, 1956 at a closed meeting.
The decision of the Presidium of the CPSU Central Committee to read this report at the congress was not unanimous. The report came as a shock to the vast majority of delegates. For the first time, many learned about Lenin’s so-called “testament” and his proposal to remove Stalin from the post of General Secretary of the Central Committee. The report spoke of purges and “illegal methods of investigation,” with the help of which absolutely incredible confessions were wrested from thousands of communists.
Khrushchev painted the image of Stalin as an executioner, guilty of the destruction of the “Leninist Guard”, who shot the 17th Congress. Thus, Khrushchev sought to blame Stalin, Yezhov and Beria for everything bad in the past and thereby rehabilitate the party, the ideas of socialism and communism. This made it possible to bypass the question of the system of organization of power, in the depths of which the debunked “cult” matured and developed.
Khrushchev particularly focused on Stalin’s guilt in the initial period of the war. But there was no complete picture of the repressions: the revelations did not concern collectivization, the famine of the 1930s, repressions against ordinary citizens, and the fight against Trotskyists and oppositionists of “all stripes” was recognized as one of Stalin’s most important achievements. In general, the report did not claim theoretical depth and analysis of such a phenomenon as Stalinism.
The closed meeting of the 20th Party Congress was not recorded in shorthand and the debate was not opened. It was decided to familiarize communists and Komsomol members with the “secret report,” as well as “non-party activists,” without publishing it in the press. They read an already edited version of Khrushchev’s report. This caused a huge public outcry. The entire spectrum of opinions was present: from disappointment with the incompleteness of the question of the “cult”, demands of the party trial of Stalin, to rejection of such a quick and sharp rejection of values that were unshakable just yesterday. There was a growing desire in society to get answers to numerous questions: about the cost of transformation; about what of the tragedies of the past was generated by Stalin personally, and what was predetermined by the party itself and the idea of building a “bright future.”
The desire to introduce criticism within a certain framework was manifested in the resolution of the CPSU Central Committee of June 30, 1956 “On overcoming the cult of personality and its consequences.” It was a step back compared to the “secret report” at the 20th Congress. Stalin was now characterized as “a man who fought for the cause of socialism,” and his crimes as “certain restrictions on intra-party Soviet democracy, inevitable in conditions of a fierce struggle against the class enemy.” In this way, Stalin's activities were explained and justified. The application of the principle: on the one hand, an outstanding figure devoted to the cause of socialism, on the other, a person who abused power, was supposed to remove the severity of criticism of the orders of the recent past, and certainly not to transfer this criticism to the present.
Over the next 30 years, criticism of Stalin in Soviet historiography was limited and opportunistic. This was manifested in the fact that, firstly, Stalin’s activities were separated from the construction of socialism and thereby, in essence, the administrative command system was justified. Secondly, the full scale of the repressions was not revealed and Lenin’s closest associates Trotsky, Bukharin, Kamenev, Zinoviev and others were not rehabilitated. Thirdly, the question of personal responsibility of Stalin’s closest circle and numerous perpetrators of terror was not raised.
Nevertheless, the significance of criticism of Stalin’s personality cult cannot be overestimated. There has been a turn towards democracy and reforms in society. The system of total fear was largely destroyed. The decisions of the 20th Congress meant a renunciation of the use of repression and terror in the internal party struggle and guaranteed security for the upper and middle layers of the party nomenklatura. The rehabilitation process not only took on a massive, ubiquitous character, but was also embodied in the restoration of the rights of entire peoples who suffered during Stalin’s era.
The policy of de-Stalinization pursued by Khrushchev, his numerous economic initiatives, which were not always distinguished by thoughtfulness and integrity, and adventurous statements (the slogan “Catch up and surpass America in meat and milk production per capita,” put forward in May 1957) caused growing discontent among the conservative part of the party. state apparatus. An expression of this was the speech of the so-called “anti-party group” within the Presidium of the CPSU Central Committee.
Malenkov, Molotov, Kaganovich, using the support of the majority, tried at a meeting of the Presidium of the Central Committee in June 1957 to remove Khrushchev from the post of First Secretary of the Central Committee (it was planned to eliminate this post altogether) and appoint him Minister of Agriculture. Accusations were brought against him of violating the principles of “collective leadership”, of forming a cult of his own personality, and of rash foreign policy actions. However, Khrushchev, having secured the support of members of the Central Committee, demanded the urgent convening of a plenum. An important role was played by the support of Khrushchev by the Minister of Defense G.K. Zhukov.
At the plenum of the CPSU Central Committee, the actions of Khrushchev's opponents were condemned. A manifestation of some democratization of the party was the fact that for the first time in many decades, the plenum of the Central Committee, rather than a narrow circle of members of the Presidium, acted as the decisive authority. Finally, the oppositionists themselves remained free and members of the party. They were removed from the Central Committee and demoted. Khrushchev was given the opportunity to continue his reform activities. However, the rational that was contained in Khrushchev’s criticism was not noticed for the time being by either himself or his circle.
The role of G.K. Zhukova in June 1957 showed the leadership the potential for army intervention in political life countries. During Zhukov’s visit to Yugoslavia and Albania in the fall of 1957, Khrushchev indiscriminately accused him of “Bonapartism” and overestimating his military merits. He was accused of “severing” the Armed Forces from the party and creating the prototype of the future special forces without the approval of the Central Committee of the Central Intelligence School. At the end of October 1957, Zhukov was removed from the post of Minister of Defense. From March 1958, Khrushchev began to combine leadership of the party and the state (he took the post of Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the USSR), which was the beginning of his sole rule.
He owed his triumph to the then political elite and, above all, to the party apparatus. This largely determined his future political line and forced adaptation to the interests of this layer. At the same time, the defeat of the “anti-party group”, the removal of Zhukov and the transformation of Khrushchev into the sole leader deprived him of any legal opposition that would restrain his not always thoughtful steps and warn against mistakes.
Socio-economic reforms.
The primary task of the economic policy of the new leadership was some decentralization of industry management and the transfer of enterprises to republican subordination. Another direction was the course to accelerate technological progress. The result was the appearance of a nuclear power plant and an icebreaker, a Tu104 civil jet aircraft, and the accelerated development of the chemical industry.
In the military sphere, nuclear submarines and missile-carrying aircraft appeared. Epochal events that go far beyond the scope of purely scientific achievements were the launch on October 4, 1957 of the world's first artificial Earth satellite and on April 12, 1961. spaceship with a person on board. The first cosmonaut in the world was Yu.A. Gagarin.
In 1957, a restructuring of economic management began, the main goal of which was the transition from a sectoral to a territorial principle. A National Economy Council was created in each economic region. In total, 105 economic councils were created and 141 ministries were liquidated. The reform pursued the following goals: decentralization of management, strengthening of territorial and interdepartmental relations, increasing the independence of production entities.
Initially, the reform brought tangible results: the decision-making path was shortened, counter transportation of goods was reduced, and hundreds of similar small industries were closed. In the 50s, according to some researchers, the growth rates of industrial production and national income were the highest in Soviet history. But this did not fundamentally change the deadlock itself. economic system. The fundamentals of the administrative command system remained unchanged. Moreover, the capital's bureaucracy, which had lost some power, showed dissatisfaction.
Reforms in the agricultural sector were even less successful. Here Khrushchev’s impulsiveness and improvisation were especially clearly manifested. For example, the introduction of corn was in itself a reasonable step for the development of livestock farming, but the development of new varieties in relation to Russian conditions required at least 10 years, and the return was expected immediately. In addition, the “queen of the fields” was planted all the way to the northern regions of the Arkhangelsk region.
The development of virgin lands turned into yet another campaign, supposedly capable of immediately solving all food problems. But after a short-term growth (in 1956-1958, virgin lands produced more than half of the harvested bread), harvests there fell sharply due to soil erosion, droughts and other natural phenomena that scientists warned about. This was an extensive development path.
Since the late 50s. the principles of material interest of collective farmers in the results of labor began to be violated again. Administrative reorganizations and campaigns began, inevitable in the existing system. A striking example was the “meat campaign in Ryazan”: a promise to triple meat production in 3 years.
The result was a sharp reduction in the number of cows put under the knife, and the suicide of the first secretary of the regional committee of the CPSU. Similar things, albeit on a smaller scale, happened everywhere. At the same time, under the banner of eliminating differences between city and countryside and building communism, restrictions and even elimination of peasants’ personal farmsteads began. The outflow of rural residents and, above all, young people to cities has increased. All this caused irreparable damage to the village.
The most successful were social reforms. Illiteracy was finally eliminated. The practice of forced (so-called “voluntary”) government loans has ceased. Since 1957, industrial housing construction began in the cities of “Khrushchev” five-story buildings. They began a change in the type of housing for millions of people: from communal apartments to separate apartments.
In 1956, old-age pensions were introduced in all state sectors (before that they were received by a limited number of workers), and in 1964 they began to be issued to collective farmers for the first time. Anti-worker laws were repealed: criminal liability for absenteeism and systematic lateness to work. Wages and the population's consumption of industrial and food products have increased significantly. There was a reduction in the working day (up to 7 hours) and the working week.
Spiritual life.
The first decade after Stalin's death was marked by significant changes in spiritual life. “The Thaw” (after the title of I. G. Ehrenburg’s story) marked the beginning of the liberation of public consciousness from dogmas and ideological stereotypes. Representatives of literature were the first to respond to the changes that began in society (works by Dudintsev, Granin, Panova, Rozov, etc.).
The work of Babel, Bulgakov, Tynyanov and others was rehabilitated. After the 20th Congress, the magazines “Moscow”, “Neva”, “Youth”, “Foreign Literature”, “Friendship of Peoples” and others appeared. A special role was played by the magazine “New World”, headed by Tvardovsky. Here, in November 1962, Solzhenitsyn’s story “One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich” was published, telling about the life of prisoners.
The decision to publish it was made at a meeting of the Presidium of the CPSU Central Committee under personal pressure from Khrushchev. A feature of the “thaw” was the emergence of so-called “pop” poetry; young authors Voznesensky, Yevtushenko, Rozhdestvensky, Akhmadulina gathered large audiences in Moscow. Cinema achieved significant success during this period. Best films: “The Cranes Are Flying” (dir. Kalatozov), “Ballad of a Soldier” (dir. Chukhrai), “The Fate of a Man” (dir. Bondarchuk) received recognition not only in the USSR, but also in the world. The CPSU Central Committee recognized the previous assessments of the work of outstanding composers Shostakovich, Prokofiev, Khachaturian and others as unfair.
However, the “thaw” in spiritual life was also a contradictory phenomenon, since it had well-defined boundaries. The authorities found new methods of influencing the intelligentsia. Since 1957, meetings between the leaders of the CPSU Central Committee and figures of art and literature have become regular. At these meetings, everything that did not fit into the official ideology was condemned. At the same time, everything that was personally incomprehensible to Khrushchev himself was denied. The personal tastes of the country's leader acquired the character of official assessments.
The loudest scandal erupted in December 1962, when Khrushchev, while visiting an exhibition in the Manege, criticized the works of young avant-garde artists, which were difficult for him to understand. One of bright examples persecution of cultural figures became the “Pasternak case”. Publication in the West of the novel Doctor Zhivago, which was not allowed to be published in the USSR by censors, and the award to B.N. Pasternak's Nobel Prize resulted in persecution of the writer. He was expelled from the Writers' Union and, in order to avoid expulsion from the country, refused the Nobel Prize. The intelligentsia was still required to be “soldiers of the party” or to adapt to the existing order.
Foreign policy.
Considering foreign policy in the Khrushchev decade, it is necessary to note its contradictory nature. In the summer of 1953, a compromise was reached between the USSR and the USA, which resulted in the signing of an armistice in Korea. In the mid-50s, Europe consisted of two opposing blocs. In response to West Germany's accession to NATO, in 1955 the countries of the socialist bloc created the Warsaw Pact Organization.
But at the same time, the foundations for stabilization in this part of the world began to be laid. The USSR normalized relations with Yugoslavia. At the 20th Congress of the CPSU, theses were substantiated about the peaceful coexistence of the two systems, about their peaceful competition, about the possibility of preventing wars in modern era, about the variety of forms of transition of different countries to socialism. At the same time, the actions of the Soviet leadership in the international arena were not always in line with these ideas.
The process initiated by the 20th Congress caused a crisis within the socialist camp. In countries of Eastern Europe who built socialism on the Stalinist model, began to move away from this model. These processes became especially acute in Poland and Hungary. In Poland, the Communist Party managed to maintain power by updating the country's leadership. In Hungary in October 1956, thousands of anti-Soviet demonstrations began, which escalated into armed action. Bloody reprisals began against state security and party officials. Under these conditions, the Soviet Union used armed force.
The pockets of armed resistance were suppressed. On November 7, 1956, the new leader of Hungary, J. Kadar, arrived in Budapest in a Soviet armored vehicle. The USSR created a precedent when disputes in the socialist camp were resolved using Soviet weapons and fulfilled the well-known rule in Europe in the first half of the 19th century. the role of Russia as a gendarme who brought “order” to Poland and Hungary.
In the USSR, helping one's ally was considered an international duty. Maintaining a forceful balance between the USSR and the USA, as well as ensuring peace “from a position of strength” after the events in Hungary became the main line of foreign policy behavior of the Soviet Union. The Hungarian events were also reflected in the USSR. They became one of the reasons for the student unrest that swept across almost the entire country.
Berlin remained one of the hottest spots in the world from 1958 to 1961. In August 1961, by decision of the political leadership of the Warsaw Pact countries, the Berlin Wall was erected overnight, a strip of fortifications that completely isolated West Berlin from the rest of the GDR. She became a symbol of the Cold War. The main instrument for maintaining the balance of power was the arms race, which concerned, first of all, the production of nuclear charges and the means of delivering them to targets. In August 1953, the USSR announced the successful testing of a hydrogen bomb, and the production of intercontinental ballistic missiles continued.
At the same time, Moscow understood the danger of further escalation of arms. The Soviet Union launched a series of disarmament initiatives, unilaterally reducing the size of its army by 3.3 million people. But these measures were not successful. One of the reasons was that peace initiatives were accompanied by constant saber-rattling. In addition, peace-loving statements were often combined with impulsive improvisations by Khrushchev, such as “We will bury you (that is, the USA)!” or that the USSR makes “rockets like sausages.”
The Cold War reached its climax in the fall of 1962, when the Cuban Missile Crisis broke out. In 1959, revolutionary rebels led by F. Castro came to power in Cuba. In April 1961, with US support, Castro's opponents tried to land on the island. The landing party was destroyed. A rapid rapprochement between Cuba and the USSR began. In the summer of 1962, Soviet missiles appeared in Cuba, posing a direct threat to the United States. The confrontation reached its peak at the end of October 1962. For several days the world was on the brink of nuclear war. It was avoided only thanks to a secret compromise between Kennedy and Khrushchev. Soviet missiles were withdrawn from Cuba in exchange for the US promise to renounce aggression against this country and the dismantling of American nuclear missiles in Turkey.
After the Caribbean crisis, a period of relative detente began in Soviet-American relations and international relations generally. A direct line of communication was established between the Kremlin and the White House. But after Kennedy's assassination (1963) and Khrushchev's resignation, this process was interrupted.
The events of 1962 deepened the split in Soviet-Chinese relations, which began after the 20th Congress. Chinese leader Mao Zedong believed that there was no need to fear a nuclear war and accused Khrushchev of capitulation. Much attention was paid to the development of relations with the states of the “third world” (developing countries). During these years, the colonial system collapsed. Dozens of new states were being formed, primarily in Africa. The USSR sought to extend its influence to these parts of the world. In 1956, the Egyptian leadership nationalized the Suez Canal.
In October 1956, Israel, England and France began military operations against Egypt. The Soviet ultimatum played a huge role in stopping them. At the same time, economic cooperation with Egypt, India, Indonesia and other countries is developing. The USSR provided them with assistance in the construction of industrial and agricultural facilities and personnel training. The main foreign policy result of this period was to prove that, with mutual desire, both superpowers (the USSR and the USA) can conduct a dialogue with each other and overcome international crises.
The Thaw Crisis.
High growth rates of industrial production in the 50s. served as the basis for optimistic forecasts. In 1959, the XXI Congress of the CPSU declared that socialism in the USSR had won a complete and final victory. The new, third Party Program adopted at the XXII Congress (1961) set the task of creating the material and technical base of communism by 1980. For this, the task was put forward to “catch up and overtake America in the main types of industrial and agricultural products.” The utopianism of the program goals of this document is obvious today. Only a small part of the planned plans was achieved.
At the same time, the propaganda of the communist myth became increasingly disconnected from reality. In 1963, a food crisis broke out in the country. There was not enough bread in the cities, and huge queues lined up for it. For the first time in the history of the USSR, grain was purchased abroad (in the first year, 12 million tons were purchased, which cost the state $1 billion). After this, purchases of imported grain became the norm. In 1962, the government announced an increase in prices for meat and dairy products (in fact, the first price increase officially announced by the state after the war and the abolition of the rationing system).
This immediately caused mass discontent and indignation, especially in work environment. Workers' discontent reached its apogee in Novocherkassk, where a 7,000-strong workers' demonstration took place. With the knowledge of the top leaders of the CPSU Mikoyan and Kozlov, she was shot by the troops. 23 people died, 49 were arrested, seven of them were sentenced to death.
Removal of N.S. Khrushchev.
All this led to a decline in Khrushchev's authority. His failure was obvious domestic policy. In army circles, dissatisfaction with Khrushchev was caused by large-scale cuts in the armed forces. Officers who served for many years were forced to go into civilian life without a profession, without a sufficient pension, and without the opportunity to find the desired job. Employees of the Ministry of Internal Affairs were deprived of a number of privileges. The party and economic bureaucracy was dissatisfied with countless reorganizations management structures, leading to frequent personnel changes. Moreover, adopted at the XXII Congress new Charter The party provided for the rotation (renewal) of personnel, which especially affected the interests of the nomenklatura, which sought to get rid of the “irrepressible reformer.”
Khrushchev's vulnerability was significantly increased by his mistakes in personnel policy and certain personal qualities: impulsiveness, a tendency to make ill-conceived, hasty decisions, and a low level of culture. Moreover, it was in 1962-1963. An ideological campaign to excessively praise Khrushchev (“the great Leninist”, “the great fighter for peace”, etc.) began to grow, which, against the backdrop of economic difficulties and the recent exposure of the cult of Stalin, further undermined his authority.
By the fall of 1964, Khrushchev’s opponents had secured the support of the leaders of the army, the KGB and the party apparatus. On October 13, 1964, Khrushchev, who was on vacation in Pitsunda (Caucasus), was summoned to Moscow for a meeting of the Presidium of the Central Committee, at which he was presented with a long list of charges. Only Mikoyan spoke in his defense. At the plenum of the Central Committee that opened after this, Khrushchev was removed from all his posts and sent into retirement. Officially, this was explained by the state of health of the country's leader. L.I. was elected First Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee. Brezhnev, and the post of head of government was taken by A.N. Kosygin. Plenum participants emphasized the need for collective leadership.
Thus, Khrushchev’s removal occurred as a result of a formally legal act at the Plenum of the Central Committee, “by simple voting.” This resolution of the conflict without arrests and repression can be considered the main result of the past decade. Khrushchev's resignation, despite the fact that it was the result of a conspiracy, did not cause discontent in the country. Both the population and the nomenclature greeted the decisions of the plenum with approval. Society longed for stability. Few people realized that along with Khrushchev’s resignation, the era of the “thaw” also ended.
The period in history from the mid-50s to the mid-60s is conventionally referred to as the “Khrushchev Thaw.” (This period received its name from the story of the same name by Ilya Ehrenburg “The Thaw”). This period is characterized by a number of significant features: condemnation of the personality cult of Stalin and the repressions of the 1930s, liberalization of the regime, release of political prisoners, liquidation of the Gulag. Some freedom of speech and relative democratization of political and social life appeared.
Nikita Sergeevich Khrushchev (1953 – 1964).
In 1953-1955, Stalin continued to be officially revered in the USSR as a great leader.
At the 20th Congress of the CPSU in 1956, N. S. Khrushchev made a report “On the cult of personality and its consequences,” in which Stalin’s cult of personality and Stalin’s repressions were criticized, and the foreign policy of the USSR proclaimed a course for “peaceful coexistence” with capitalist peace. Khrushchev also began a rapprochement with Yugoslavia, relations with which had been severed under Stalin.
In general, the new course was supported at the top of the party and corresponded to the interests of the nomenklatura, since previously even the most prominent party figures who fell into disgrace had to fear for their lives. Many surviving political prisoners in the USSR and socialist countries were released and rehabilitated. Since 1953, commissions for verification of cases and rehabilitation have been formed. The majority of peoples deported in the 1930s-1940s were allowed to return to their homeland.
Labor legislation was liberalized (in 1956, criminal liability for absenteeism was abolished).
Tens of thousands of German and Japanese prisoners of war were sent home. In some countries, relatively liberal leaders came to power, such as Imre Nagy in Hungary. An agreement was reached on the state neutrality of Austria and the withdrawal of all occupation forces from it. In 1955, Khrushchev met in Geneva with US President Dwight Eisenhower and the heads of government of Great Britain and France.
At the same time, de-Stalinization had an extremely negative impact on relations with Maoist China. The CCP condemned de-Stalinization as revisionism.
In 1957, the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR prohibited the naming of cities and factories after party leaders during their lifetime.
Limits and contradictions of the Thaw[edit | edit wiki text]
The thaw period did not last long. Already with the suppression of the Hungarian uprising of 1956, clear boundaries of the policy of openness emerged. The party leadership was frightened by the fact that liberalization of the regime in Hungary led to open anti-communist protests and violence; accordingly, liberalization of the regime in the USSR could lead to the same consequences. On December 19, 1956, the Presidium of the CPSU Central Committee approved the text of the Letter of the CPSU Central Committee “On strengthening the political work of party organizations among the masses and suppressing the attacks of anti-Soviet, hostile elements.” It said: " The Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union considers it necessary to appeal to all party organizations ... in order to attract the attention of the party and mobilize communists to strengthen political work among the masses, to resolutely fight to suppress the attacks of anti-Soviet elements who are Lately, due to some aggravation of the international situation, intensified their hostile activities against the Communist Party and the Soviet state" It went on to talk about the recent “intensification of the activities of anti-Soviet and hostile elements.” First of all, this is a “counter-revolutionary conspiracy against the Hungarian people”, conceived under the guise of “false slogans of freedom and democracy” using “the discontent of a significant part of the population caused by serious mistakes made by the former state and party leadership of Hungary.” It was also stated: “Recently, among individual workers literature and art, sliding from party positions, politically immature and philistine-minded, there were attempts to question the correctness of the party line in the development of Soviet literature and art, to move away from the principles of socialist realism to the positions of unprincipled art, demands were put forward to “liberate” literature and art from the party leadership , to ensure “freedom of creativity”, understood in the bourgeois-anarchist, individualistic spirit.” The letter contained instructions to communists working in state security agencies to “vigilantly guard the interests of our socialist state, be vigilant to the machinations of hostile elements and, in accordance with the laws of Soviet power, promptly suppress criminal actions.” A direct consequence of this letter was a significant increase in 1957 in the number of people convicted of “counter-revolutionary crimes” (2948 people, which is 4 times more than in 1956). Students were expelled from institutes for making critical statements.
· 1953 - mass protests in the GDR; in 1956 - in Poland.
· 1956 - the pro-Stalin uprising of Georgian youth in Tbilisi was suppressed.
· 1957 - prosecution of Boris Pasternak for publishing a novel in Italy.
· 1958 - mass unrest in Grozny was suppressed. In the 1960s, Nikolaev dockers, during interruptions in the supply of bread, refused to ship grain to Cuba.
· 1961 - in violation of current legislation [Note. 1] currency traders Rokotov and Faibishenko were shot (Rokotov-Faibishenko-Yakovlev Case).
· 1962 - workers' protest in Novocherkassk was suppressed using weapons.
· 1964 - Joseph Brodsky was arrested [Note. 2] The trial of the poet became one of the factors in the emergence of the human rights movement in the USSR.
Thaw in art[edit | edit wiki text]
During the period of de-Stalinization, censorship noticeably weakened, primarily in literature, cinema and other forms of art, where a more critical coverage of reality became possible. The “first poetic bestseller” of the thaw was a collection of poems by Leonid Martynov (Poems. M., Molodaya Gvardiya, 1955). The main platform of the “thaw” supporters was the literary magazine “New World”. Some works of this period became famous abroad, including Vladimir Dudintsev’s novel “Not by Bread Alone” and Alexander Solzhenitsyn’s story “One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich.” Other significant representatives of the Thaw period were writers and poets Viktor Astafiev, Vladimir Tendryakov, Bella Akhmadulina, Robert Rozhdestvensky, Andrei Voznesensky, Evgeny Yevtushenko. Film production was sharply increased.
Grigory Chukhrai was the first in cinema to touch upon the theme of de-Stalinization and the Thaw in the film “Clear Sky” (1963). The main film directors of the Thaw were Marlen Khutsiev, Mikhail Romm, Georgy Danelia, Eldar Ryazanov, Leonid Gaidai. The films “Carnival Night”, “Ilyich’s Outpost”, “Spring on Zarechnaya Street”, “Idiot”, “I Walk Through Moscow”, “Amphibian Man”, “Welcome, or No Trespassing” and other.
In 1955-1964, television broadcasting was extended to most of the country. Television studios are open in all capitals of the union republics and in many regional centers.
The VI World Festival of Youth and Students takes place in Moscow in 1957.
Thaw in architecture[edit | edit wiki text]
Main articles: On eliminating excesses in design and construction, Khrushchevka
Increasing pressure on religious associations[edit | edit wiki text]
Main article: Khrushchev's anti-religious campaign
In 1956, the anti-religious struggle began to intensify. The secret resolution of the CPSU Central Committee “On the note of the department of propaganda and agitation of the CPSU Central Committee for the union republics “On the shortcomings of scientific-atheistic propaganda”” dated October 4, 1958 obliged party, Komsomol and public organizations launch a propaganda offensive against “religious relics”; government agencies it was ordered to carry out administrative measures aimed at tightening the conditions for the existence of religious communities. On October 16, 1958, the Council of Ministers of the USSR adopted the Resolutions “On monasteries in the USSR” and “On increasing taxes on the income of diocesan enterprises and monasteries.”
On April 21, 1960, the new chairman of the Council for the Affairs of the Russian Orthodox Church, Vladimir Kuroyedov, appointed in February of the same year, in his report at the All-Union Meeting of Commissioners of the Council, characterized the work of its previous leadership as follows: “The main mistake of the Council for the Affairs of the Orthodox Church was that it inconsistently pursued the line party and state in relation to the church and often slipped into positions serving church organizations. Taking a defensive position in relation to the church, the council pursued a line not to combat violations of the legislation on cults by the clergy, but to protect church interests.”
The secret instructions on the application of legislation on cults in March 1961 paid special attention to the fact that ministers of worship do not have the right to interfere in the administrative, financial and economic activities of religious communities. The instructions for the first time identified “sects whose creed and nature of activities are anti-state and fanatical in nature: Jehovah’s Witnesses, Pentecostals, Adventist Reformists” that were not subject to registration.
In the mass consciousness, a statement attributed to Khrushchev from that period has been preserved, in which he promises to show the last priest on television in 1980.
The end of the “thaw”[edit | edit wiki text]
The end of the “thaw” is considered to be the removal of Khrushchev and the coming to leadership of Leonid Brezhnev in 1964. However, the tightening of the internal political regime and ideological control began during the reign of Khrushchev after the end of the Caribbean crisis. De-Stalinization was stopped, and in connection with the celebration of the 20th anniversary of the victory in the Great Patriotic War the process of exalting the role of the victory of the Soviet people in the war began. They tried to avoid Stalin’s personality as much as possible; he was never rehabilitated. There was a neutral article about him in the TSB. In 1979, several articles were published on the occasion of Stalin's 100th birthday, but no special celebrations were held.
Mass political repressions, however, were not resumed, and Khrushchev, deprived of power, retired and even remained a member of the party. Shortly before this, Khrushchev himself criticized the concept of “thaw” and even called Ehrenburg, who invented it, a “swindler.”
A number of researchers believe that the Thaw finally ended in 1968 after the suppression of the Prague Spring.
With the end of the “thaw,” criticism of Soviet reality began to spread only through unofficial channels, such as Samizdat.
Mass riots in the USSR[edit | edit wiki text]
· On June 10-11, 1957, an emergency occurred in the city of Podolsk, Moscow region. The actions of a group of citizens who spread rumors that police officers killed the detained driver. The size of the “group of drunken citizens” is 3 thousand people. 9 instigators were brought to justice.
· August 23-31, 1958, the city of Grozny. Reasons: the murder of a Russian guy against the backdrop of heightened interethnic tensions. The crime caused a wide public outcry, and spontaneous protests grew into a large-scale political uprising, to suppress which troops had to be sent into the city. See Riots in Grozny (1958)
· January 15, 1961, Krasnodar. Reasons: the actions of a group of drunken citizens who spread rumors about the beating of a serviceman when he was detained by a patrol for violating the wearing of his uniform. Number of participants - 1300 people. Firearms were used and one person was killed. 24 people were brought to criminal responsibility. See Anti-Soviet rebellion in Krasnodar (1961).
· On June 25, 1961, in the city of Biysk, Altai Territory, 500 people took part in mass riots. They stood up for a drunk who the police wanted to arrest at the central market. The drunken citizen resisted the public order officers during his arrest. There was a fight involving weapons. One person was killed, one was injured, 15 were prosecuted.
· On June 30, 1961, in the city of Murom, Vladimir Region, over 1.5 thousand workers of the local plant named after Ordzhonikidze almost destroyed the construction of a medical sobering-up station, in which one of the employees of the enterprise, taken there by the police, died. Law enforcement officers used weapons, two workers were injured, and 12 men were brought to justice.
· On July 23, 1961, 1,200 people took to the streets of the city of Aleksandrov, Vladimir Region, and moved to the city police department to rescue their two detained comrades. The police used weapons, as a result of which four were killed, 11 were wounded, and 20 people were put in the dock.
· September 15-16, 1961, street riots in the North Ossetian city of Beslan. The number of rioters was 700 people. The riot arose due to an attempt by the police to detain five people who were drunk in a public place. Armed resistance was provided to the law enforcement officers. One was killed. Seven were put on trial.
· June 1-2, 1962, Novocherkassk, Rostov region, 4 thousand workers of the electric locomotive plant, dissatisfied with the actions of the administration in explaining the reasons for the increase in retail prices for meat and milk, went out to protest. The protesting workers were dispersed with the help of troops. 23 people were killed, 70 were wounded. 132 instigators were brought to criminal responsibility, seven of whom were later shot (See Novocherkassk execution)
· June 16-18, 1963, the city of Krivoy Rog, Dnepropetrovsk region. About 600 people took part in the performance. The reason was resistance to police officers by a drunken serviceman during his arrest and the actions of a group of people. Four killed, 15 wounded, 41 brought to justice.
· November 7, 1963, the city of Sumgayit, more than 800 people stood up to defend the demonstrators who walked with photographs of Stalin. The police and vigilantes tried to take away the unauthorized portraits. Weapons were used. One demonstrator was injured, six sat in the dock (See Mass riots in Sumgayit (1963)).
· On April 16, 1964, in Bronnitsy near Moscow, about 300 people destroyed a bullpen, where a city resident died from beatings. The police provoked popular outrage with their unauthorized actions. No weapons were used, there were no killed or wounded. 8 people were brought to criminal responsibility.
De-Stalinization- the process of overcoming the cult of personality and eliminating the political and ideological system created in the USSR during the reign of I.V. Stalin. This process led to a partial democratization of public life, called the “thaw.” The term "de-Stalinization" has been used in Western literature since the 1960s.
Sometimes they talk about three so-called “waves” of de-Stalinization.
· 1 Khrushchev Thaw
o 1.1 Khrushchev's indecisiveness
· 2 Brezhnev era
· 3 Perestroika
· 4 Overcoming the past
· 5 After 2000
· 6 Support for de-Stalinization
· 7 Criticism of the de-Stalinization program
· 8 Public opinion on de-Stalinization
· 9 Individual opinions
· 10 See also
· 11 Notes
Khrushchev's Thaw[edit | edit wiki text]
Main articles: Khrushchev's thaw, XX Congress of the CPSU, About the cult of personality and its consequences
The process of partial transformation of the Soviet state-political system began already in 1953, when the first steps were taken to eliminate the consequences of Stalin's repressive policies and to partially restore law and order. Already in the theses of the department of propaganda and agitation of the CPSU Central Committee and the Marx-Engels-Lenin-Stalin Institute under the CPSU Central Committee for the fiftieth anniversary of the CPSU it was said: “The cult of personality contradicts the principle of collective leadership, leads to a decrease in the creative activity of the party masses and the Soviet people and has nothing to do with Marxist-Leninist understanding of the high importance of the directing activities of governing bodies and leading figures...” This statement marked the beginning of the process of de-Stalinization both in the country and in the party leadership.
In February 1956, the 20th Congress of the CPSU took place, at which the first secretary of the CPSU Central Committee N. S. Khrushchev made a report “On the cult of personality and its consequences,” where he condemned the practice of mass repressions in the USSR and dated their beginning to 1934, thereby excluding Among the crimes of the Stalinist regime were “dekulakization”, as well as political repressions of the early 1930s. Stalin's political behavior was contrasted with the “correct” Bolshevik policy, which was generally recognized as legitimate and in accordance with Lenin’s ideological principles. The entire burden of blame for unleashing political repression was placed on I.V. Stalin and his inner circle. At the same time, Khrushchev sought to exclude his involvement in Stalin’s political terror, so criticism of Stalinism was limited, reliable information about political repression was strictly dosed and presented to Soviet society with the sanction of the highest party and state leadership. The exposure of Stalinism, begun by Khrushchev at the 20th Congress, did not affect the essence of the Soviet command-administrative system, reducing all the shortcomings of the system to the cult of Stalin’s personality.
Khrushchev's campaign to cleanse Stalin's legacy from the public sphere began in the late 1950s. During the process of de-Stalinization, all settlements, streets and squares, enterprises and collective farms that bore the name of Stalin were everywhere renamed. Stalinabad, the capital of the Tajik SSR, received its former name Dushanbe. Staliniri, the capital of the South Ossetian Autonomous Okrug, was returned to the historical name of Tskhinvali. Stalino (formerly Yuzovka) was renamed Donetsk. Stalinsk (the oldest city of Kuznetsk) was named Novokuznetsk. The Stalinskaya metro station in Moscow was renamed Semyonovskaya (1961). In Bulgaria, the name Varna was returned to the city of Stalin, in Poland Stalinogrud again became Katowice, in Romania the name of Brasov was returned to the city of Stalin, etc.
During the same period, monuments and monumental images of Stalin were also dismantled in the USSR with almost 100% coverage - from gigantic ones, 24 m high (on the banks of the Volga at the entrance to the Volga-Don Canal), to his images in interiors, for example, in the Moscow metro.
Likewise, the names of Stalin’s closest associates, declared members of the “anti-party group”, were erased from the map of the USSR: the name Perm was returned to the city of Molotov, Nolinsk was returned to Molotovsk, the Moscow metro, which bore the name of Kaganovich from its opening in 1935, was renamed in honor of V. .AND. Lenin.
The process of official de-Stalinization, which began in 1956, reached its peak in 1961 at the XXII Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. As a result of the congress, the two most significant acts of de-Stalinization were adopted: on October 31, 1961, Stalin's body was removed from the Mausoleum and buried in Red Square, and on November 11, 1961, Stalingrad was renamed Volgograd.
Khrushchev's indecisiveness[edit | edit wiki text]
The information about Stalin's repressions presented by Khrushchev to the 20th Congress was far from complete. Some old communists who went through the Gulag, such as A. V. Snegov and O. G. Shatunovskaya convinced Khrushchev to bring de-Stalinization to its logical conclusion, publish documents from Stalin’s personal archive and conduct an investigation into the perpetrators of repression. Otherwise, in their opinion, the danger of revenge by the Stalinists who have settled in the highest echelons of power will remain. However, Khrushchev rejected these proposals and arguments, fearing that “settling scores would cause a new wave of violence and hatred.” Instead, he proposed postponing the publication of archival documents incriminating Stalin for 15 years.
State University of Management
Institute of National and World Economy
Specialty: Organizational Management
Department of Cultural Studies.
Abstract on the topic:
"Thaw" in the cultural life of the country (mid-50s-60s)"
Checked by: Levkovich Lyudmila Nikolaevna
Completed by: 1st year student, group 3
Moscow 2004.
Plan:
1. Introduction…………………………………………………….1
2. Literature………………...……………………………………...2
3. Sculpture and architecture……………………………...3
4. Music……………………………………………………..5
5. Theater………………………………………………………...6
6. Cinematography……………………………………………8
7. Conclusion………..……………………………………..10
8. References……………………………………………………11