I haven’t really studied Soviet history post Nikita so idk anything about Leonid
He was just kind of bad at management. He didn’t see the importance of computers and didn’t have good policies to reverse the stagnation.
I read that alot of Brezhnev’s policies were a return of capitalist elements, such as allowing economic enterprises to “fail” if they were unprofitable and making housing more market-like.
In a vacuum, I don’t like these policies, but maybe they make more sense in context, I’m not sure. I know some limited reforms in the housing market were helpful.
Didn’t USSR have like 5% GDP growth per annum during the Brezhnev stagnation? (not that GDP is really an important economic indicator)
He wasn’t, imho.
Lmao checks out.
He was generally pro-Stalin and didn’t really have anything negative to say about him, especially versus someone like Khruschev, who Brezhnev played a role in ousting.
As I expected. Khrushchev was not just revisionist for denouncing Stalin. That’s all a lot of people care about, but he declared the end of class struggle and implemented bad “reforms” that led to the rotting of the union from the inside. Brezhnev did nothing to reverse such revisionism.
Brezhnev on multiple times proclaimed class struggle to be a fact and constant struggle. Plus, some of his insights and theoretical contributions are sound, like on state monopoly capital.
Class struggle in the Soviet Union or globally? More investigation may be due, but my impression is that he continued many of Khrushchev’s policies and the USSR continued to decline in this era.
Yeah, that’s a good point, I just remember that a lot of the works of that period and his speeches stress class struggle as a huge element in the fight for socialism, but eh, he could be speaking generally.
Nothing. That is doing nothing is what made him a revisionist. He didn’t undo Khrushchev’s policies either on the economic side (at least not sufficiently) or on the political side (no rehabilitation of Stalin).
exactly right
