IN 1985 g. political leadership in the country passed to M.S. Gorbachev.

A new course for the country’s development was developed, called “perestroika.” The nature of the new course was determined by the desire to reform Soviet society, which by the 80s. entered into a protracted socio-economic crisis. New course envisioned a combination of socialism and democracy.

Designed in The 1987 reform project envisaged:

1) expand the economic independence of enterprises;

2) revive the private sector of the economy;

3) abandon the foreign trade monopoly;

4) reduce the number of administrative authorities;

5) in agriculture, recognize the equality of five forms of ownership: collective farms, state farms, agricultural complexes, rental cooperatives and farms.

There are three stages of restructuring:

1) 1985–1986;

2) 1987–1988;

3) 1989–1991

First stage. Acceleration period 1985 –1986 years:

1) the new course was started in April ( 1985 d.) Plenum of the CPSU Central Committee. They talked about the urgency of profound changes in all areas of society; the lever of change should have been the acceleration of the country's socio-economic development;

2) the success of the acceleration course was associated with:

– with more active use of scientific and technological revolution achievements;

– decentralization of management national economy;

– introduction of self-financing;

– strengthening discipline in production;

3) on the basis of the reformed economy, it was planned to solve important social problems - housing (to 2000 g.) and food.

Second phase. Glasnost and perestroika 1987 –1988 years:

1) changes in the socio-political sphere began with the implementation of the policy of openness. Censorship was lifted and the publication of new newspapers and magazines was allowed;

2) in an atmosphere of more real freedom in the country, numerous public associations began to emerge in support of perestroika;

3) the role of journalism and the media has increased. The process of restoring the historical memory of the people and revealing the “blank spots” of history has begun. Criticism of V.I. is no longer taboo. Lenin.

Difficulties and contradictions of perestroika:

1) economic reform did not lead to positive changes. Problems worsened Everyday life. The need for a transition to full-fledged market relations became obvious;

2) despite multi-million dollar injections into the economy, it was not possible to reach the forefront, and hopes for the law on cooperation did not come true. But the “shadow economy” was legalized;

3) the inconsistency of the ongoing transformations within the command-administrative system was especially clearly manifested in the political sphere. The issue of eliminating the monopoly of the CPSU and intensifying the activities of the Soviets became relevant;

4) in 1989 a democratic opposition (Interregional Deputy Group) is beginning to take shape in the country, which advocated the need not for reforms, but for changes in the entire social system that existed in the USSR;

5) although at the III Congress of Soviets of People's Deputies of the USSR the monopoly of the CPSU was abolished, the presidency was introduced in the country (M.S. Gorbachev became the president of the USSR), this institution turned out to be very weak and could not resist the collapse of the state, which begins after the dismantling of its foundation - party power.

Perestroika had an ambiguous impact on social processes within the USSR. Contrary to party conclusions that the USSR national question resolved completely and finally, in the USSR the process of aggravation of interethnic relations began to rapidly develop, developing in some regions into ethnic wars. These processes were based on both political and economic reasons. A sharp decline in the economy, the weakening role of the CPSU, the transfer of local power into the hands of local national elites, interfaith and ethnocultural contradictions - all this contributed to the aggravation of interethnic conflicts on the territory of the USSR.

The culmination of interethnic conflicts was the “parade of sovereignties.” It was initiated by the Baltic republics. On June 12, 1990, the RSFSR joined it. Declaration of sovereignty called into question the continued existence of the USSR. In the summer and autumn 1990 began to proclaim themselves sovereign republics, territories and regions of Russia. A “parade of sovereignties” unfolded. March 1991 on the territory of the USSR was held referendum, which showed that the majority of the population wants to live in a single state. However, local and regional democrats ignored the opinion of the people. The collapse of a single economic complex and the desire to break a single state space forced the leadership of the Union to look for ways to reform and develop a new union treaty.

This work began in May 1991 in Novo-Ogarevo. The signing of the agreement was scheduled for August 20, 1991. It was planned to create a Union of sovereign states, which would include nine former republics THE USSR. Changes were also planned in the structure of government and administration, the adoption of a new Constitution, and changes in the electoral system. However, opponents of signing such an agreement - representatives of the old party apparatus - decided to prevent its signing. In August 1991 they attempted a coup. These events went down in the history of our country under the name “August Putsch.” Supporters of maintaining the previous system (Vice President G.N. Yanaev, Kryuchkov (Chairman of the KGB), V. Pavlov (Chairman of the Cabinet of Ministers), D. Yazov (Minister of Defense), B. Pugo (Minister of Internal Affairs)) tried to stage a coup, sent troops into Moscow on August 19, 1991 and declared state of emergency(AUGUST COUP is an attempt at an anti-constitutional coup. It was aimed at restoring the power of the party-state nomenklatura) the putschists declared that Gorbachev could not fulfill his duties for health reasons, and Gorbachev was blocked at his dacha in Crimea. Resistance was provided by the leadership of the Russian Federation, headed by the President of the RSFSR Yeltsin. The putschists were arrested. 3 people died in clashes with troops. The putsch ended in failure. Result: the fall of the communist regime and the acceleration of the collapse of the USSR.

December 8 1991 g., gathered in Belovezhskaya Pushcha the leaders of three sovereign states - Russia (B.N. Yeltsin), Belarus (S.S. Shushkevich) and Ukraine (L.M. Kravchuk) - signed the Belovezhskaya Agreement, according to which the USSR, as a subject international law, ceased to exist. The creation of the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) was also announced. On December 25, Gorbachev resigned his presidential powers. The USSR ceased to exist. The collapse of the USSR and the conclusion of the Belovezhskaya Accords did not receive unanimous approval in Russia. With the collapse of the USSR and the formation of the USSR, perestroika collapsed.

With the collapse of the USSR (December 1991) status Russian Federation as independent sovereign state became a legal and factual reality. Formative period Russian statehood ended on December 12, 1993, when the Constitution of the Russian Federation was adopted in a national referendum and the Soviet political system was finally dismantled.

M.S. Gorbachev to the presidency in March 1985. And already on April 23 of the same year, he announced a course towards perestroika. It is worth saying that the political course initially proclaimed by the president was called “acceleration and restructuring,” with the emphasis placed on the word “acceleration.” Subsequently, it disappeared, and the term “perestroika” took first place.

The essence of the new political course truly amazed sensible politicians, because Gorbachev prioritized accelerated development and industrial production in an unprecedented volume. From 1986 to 2000, it was planned to produce the same number of goods as they had produced in the previous 70 years.

However, such a grandiose plan was not destined to come true. The term “acceleration” lost popularity by the end of 1987, and perestroika lasted only until 1991, ending with the collapse of the Union.

The first stage of new times

Perestroika began with a radical change in party leaders. It is impossible not to say that the personnel nomenclature during the time when Chernenko and Andropov ruled the country has become so old that average age party leader was 70 s extra years. Naturally, it was unacceptable. And Gorbachev seriously took up the task of “rejuvenating” the party apparatus.

Another important feature of the first period of perestroika was the implementation of the glasnost policy. For the first time in many years, reality in the Soviet Union was shown not only in a life-affirming light, but also reflected its negative sides. Some freedom of speech appeared, of course, still timid and not in full force, but then it was perceived as a breath of air on a stuffy afternoon.
In foreign policy, Gorbachev sought to strengthen and improve Soviet-American relations. This resulted in a unilateral ban nuclear tests.

Results of the beginning of perestroika

It is worth saying that the first perestroika stage brought some changes to the life of Soviet people and society as a whole. It was possible to rejuvenate the composition of the party leadership, which only benefited the country and its inhabitants. Glasnost led to the release of tension in society, and thanks to nuclear disarmament, the situation in the world was defused.

However, then mistake after mistake, discrepancies between words and deeds on the part of the government led to the fact that the achieved results came to naught.

Her whole trick was to intensify labor, but without increasing wages. That is, they wanted to go out on people, exploiting them even more. Naturally, such an experiment failed. There were no fools to work harder for the same money. There was a State Planning Committee, there were prices and production standards. If the plan was exceeded, the standards were increased at the same prices. Why did people need to work harder? No need. And perestroika collapsed, ending with the collapse of the USSR, and before that there was an operetta putsch.

Today, with capitalist relations and the introduction of private ownership of the means of production, there is no need to urge workers. They themselves know how you work is how you earn. But the salaries at state-owned enterprises, and even at some private entrepreneurs, are very low. And, consequently, newspapers are full of job advertisements given the existing unemployment in the country. Only the salaries for such jobs are generally less than the subsistence level. Naturally, no one will work at a loss. Only pensioners will work at low rates.
How many government programs have collapsed in . Khrushchev built communism, so much so that he quietly removed Nikita from his high post. Then, during the last months of Leonid Brezhnev’s rule, they announced a food program that was in effect until 1990. We carried it out, carried it out, and today we live on the “food needle” of the West. The housing construction program was also curtailed. Buy any apartment today if you have the money. But not every family has them, especially young ones.

Listening to the Prime Minister's speech today, where he talks about modernization, it is bitter and offensive. His words sound like a distant echo of the socialist economy. What should we modernize? An industry that is dying? Or an economy fueled by oil and gas? Or maybe a new breed of human slaves can be developed?

It is possible to modernize something that actually works. For example, in the USA it is possible to carry out modernization Agriculture. It, as one professor there put it, can pull the entire economy along with it, like a locomotive. And with its normal functioning, all control over it will disappear. The lower the prices for food products, the easier it is for people to live, the richer the country's citizens will be, the more successfully industry can be developed. Like this.

At the end of the 70s, a serious socio-economic crisis was brewing in Soviet society. Due to his advanced age and chronic illnesses, L. I. Brezhnev could no longer lead the state.

Reasons for the start of perestroika

He delegated his powers to ministers, who carried out state policy at their own discretion. Society increasingly felt the backwardness of the USSR from Western countries, but, unfortunately, there was no leader in the state who could initiate reforms.

The main reasons are:

• - Centralization of power in the hands of the Party;
• - As a result, censorship of information, lack of transparency;
• - Low competitiveness of Soviet goods on the world market, low labor productivity;
• - Shortage of goods on the market.

In the mid-80s, the post of General Secretary of the USSR was taken by Mikhail Gorbachev, who, unlike his predecessors Chernenko and Andropov, was not afraid to begin large-scale reform activities.

The beginning of perestroika

In 1985, the new leader of the Soviet state announced the course of his policy, which was aimed at a complete renewal of society. Carrying out reforms required the support of the population; for this, Gorbachev significantly softened censorship and control over the media, and allowed criticism of the actions of the authorities.

The first step towards reforming public life was an attempt to restructure the economy from a planned one to a market one. The inconsistency of economic reform led to a severe crisis: deficits, inflation, and lack of jobs became an integral part of the life of the Soviet people.

Changes also affected the political structure of the Soviet state. For the first time in the history of the country, the actual transfer of power from state executive bodies to the elected parliament of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR took place.

During the period of perestroika, the USSR government completely changed its priorities foreign policy. M. Gorbachev and his closest associates understood that without borrowing the experience of European capitalist countries, they would not be able to update and modernize state socialism.

M. Gorbachev visited a number of countries on an official visit Western Europe and the USA. As a result of the restoration of dialogue with democratic states, the period of geopolitical confrontation between the socialist USSR and the capitalist Western world, which began at the end of the Second World War, ended.

In 1989, M. Gorbachev initiated the withdrawal Soviet troops from the Republic of Afghanistan, which can be regarded as a compromise step for rapprochement with the West. At the end of the Cold War, the Federal Republic of Germany and the GDR, which had been at odds with each other for many decades, united.

Historical significance and results of the perestroika period

M. Gorbachev, having initiated fundamental changes in the system state power, ignored the historical pattern: the existence of any empire is possible only under conditions of a harsh despotic regime.

The period of perestroika, which began with slogans of social and political renewal, ended with the Union republics being given the right to make their own political decisions, which inevitably led to the collapse of the Soviet Union and the collapse of communist ideas.

Introduction 2

1.Perestroika in the USSR. Main events. 3

2. Russia during perestroika 3

3.Public life and culture during the period of Perestroika. 8

4. Economy of Siberia during the perestroika period 12

Conclusion 18

Bibliography 21

Introduction

The concept of “perestroika” is very controversial: everyone means by it something that corresponds to his political views. I understand the word “perestroika” as a set of socio-political processes in the period 1985-1991.

In the mid-80s, the leadership of the CPSU declared a course towards perestroika. In terms of the scale of the changes it caused in Europe, and throughout the world, it is rightly compared with such historical events as the Great French Revolution or October 1917 in Russia.

Relevance of the topic of the work: undoubtedly, the topic of Perestroika in the USSR will be relevant for another year or two, because the consequences of this step by the government, which was still Soviet at that time, are still being felt today. There are still discussions and debates about whether it was necessary to change the course of the country so radically: economic and political, whether there were positive results, or whether it only had a negative impact on the situation in the country.

The purpose of this work was to study Perestroika as a historical stage in the life of the Russian people.

Job objectives:

List the main stages of Perestroika;

Analyze the political and economic situation in the country;

Talk about the cultural and social life of that period;

Tell us about Siberia during the era of Perestroika.

1. Perestroika in the USSR. Main events.

In March 1985 to post Secretary General The Central Committee of the CPSU was elected by M. S. Gorbachev, “Prohibition”, in the late 80s. - the beginning of a decline in production, inflation, general deficit).

In January 1987 at the plenum of the Central Committee - the proclamation of the policy of “glasnost”.

1988- by decision of the Politburo of the CPSU Central Committee, a Commission was created to study Stalin’s repressions.

June 1988- XIX Conference of the CPSU (the beginning of the reform of the political system of the USSR, the law on cooperation).

February 1989- withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan.

May 1989- I Congress of People's Deputies (sharp political polarization, the formation of opposing currents).

March 1990- III Congress of Soviets (election of Gorbachev as President of the USSR, abolition of Article 6 of the Constitution on the leading role of the CPSU).

August 1991. - putsch.

2. Russia during the period of perestroika

In March 1985 M. S. Gorbachev was elected to the post of General Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee, who set a course for changing the political and economic system of the USSR.

Lagging behind the United States in the space arms race and the inability, for economic reasons, to respond to the “Star Wars” program convinced the ruling circles of the USSR that the competition in the field of high technology was almost lost.

The point was not at all about changing the system (the existing one suited the ruling elite quite well). They only sought to adapt this system to new international conditions.

In the original perestroika project, technology was put at the forefront, not people, who were assigned the unclear role of the “human factor.”

The reasons for the emerging crisis in the economy must be sought in the ugly structure of the country's national economy and the lack of serious incentives to work. All this should be multiplied by the serious management mistakes made at the beginning of perestroika.

At the XVII Congress of the CPSU the question was posed correctly: to turn production towards the consumer and activate the human factor. But how to achieve this goal? Gorbachev chose a completely Marxist method - trial and error.

First there was “acceleration” - a naive attempt, with the help of ideological incantations and appeals to “everyone in his own workplace,” to make the rusty economic mechanism turn faster. But persuasion alone was not enough: only one-seventh of the main resources were used for the production of consumer goods. production assets. And the government started small-scale industrialization in order to ultimately modernize the backward light industry. All this, however, ended in failure already at the first stage: billions of dollars of government investment in basic industries disappeared without a trace in the general bedlam - the light industry never received new equipment, materials, technologies.

Then they reduced the purchase of consumer goods and used foreign currency to purchase equipment abroad. The result is minimal. Some of the equipment remained in warehouses and in the open air due to a lack of production space. But what we managed to install gave failures. Entire production lines were idle due to improper operation, lack of spare parts, and poor quality of raw materials.

Finally, they realized that in the absence of incentives for producers, nothing will turn around in the economy. We decided to give enterprises self-supporting independence. But limited freedom turned into only the right to uncontrolled spending of public funds and led to price inflation, a reduction in production volumes and a sharp increase in the money supply in cash circulation.

The increase in earnings did not in any way affect the output of final consumer products, since money was paid not only to producers of goods, but also to everyone else, without exception.

The desire of the authorities to look good without any reason has played a bad joke on them. Without cutting back on previous spending, the center and localities developed countless social programs and pumped inflationary money into the economy. Inflated effective demand began to slowly crush both trade and the consumer sector of industry.

The losses of the national economy from Gorbachev’s reforms grew. The second wind to socialism never came - the agony began

By the end of 1991, we had a hybrid of the bureaucratic and economic markets (the first prevailed), we had almost complete (precisely due to the fundamental legal uncertainty regarding formal property rights) nomenklatura capitalism. The ideal form for bureaucratic capitalism prevailed - the pseudo-state form of activity of private capital. In the political sphere, it is a hybrid of Soviet and presidential forms of government, a post-communist and pre-democratic republic.

During the years of “perestroika”, surprisingly little was done to actually reform the economic mechanism. The laws adopted by the Union leadership expanded the rights of enterprises, allowed small private and cooperative entrepreneurship, but did not affect the fundamental foundations of the command-distribution economy. The paralysis of the central government and, as a consequence, the weakening of state control over the national economy, the progressive disintegration of production ties between enterprises of different union republics, the increased autocracy of directors, the short-sighted policy of artificial growth of incomes of the population and other populist measures in the economy - all this led to an increase during 1990 – 1991 economic crisis in the country. The destruction of the old economic system was not accompanied by the emergence of a new one in its place.

The country already had real freedom of speech, which grew out of the “glasnost” policy, a multi-party system was taking shape, elections were held on an alternative basis (from several candidates), and a formally independent press appeared. But the predominant position of one party remained - the CPSU, which had merged with the state apparatus. The Soviet form of organization of state power did not provide a generally recognized separation of powers into legislative, executive and judicial branches. It was necessary to reform the country's state-political system.

By the end of 1991, the USSR economy found itself in a catastrophic situation. The decline in production accelerated. National income decreased by 20% compared to 1990. The government budget deficit, the excess of government spending over revenue, ranged from 20% to 30% of gross domestic product (GDP). The increase in the money supply in the country threatened the loss of state control over the financial system and hyperinflation, that is, inflation of over 50% per month, which could paralyze the entire economy.

An important element of the structure of the domestic economy is the inflated level of employment compared to its normal value. Hence the artificial and very significant underestimation of the level of labor productivity and, accordingly, even greater tension in the consumer market. A striking example of this situation is the situation that arose in 1991, when a 12% drop in GNP over 9 months was practically not accompanied by a reduction in the number of employees, but occurred only due to a decrease in labor productivity. The gap between actual effective employment grew and was covered by the only possible means - inflation in both its forms - shortages and rising prices. A further increase in this gap forms another factor in the inflation rate that must be taken into account.

The accelerated growth of wages and benefits, which began in 1989, increased pent-up demand; by the end of the year, most goods disappeared from state trade, but were sold at exorbitant prices in commercial stores and on the “black market.” Between 1985 and 1991, retail prices almost tripled, and government price controls could not stop inflation. Unexpected interruptions in the supply of various consumer goods to the population caused “crises” (tobacco, sugar, vodka) and huge queues. A standardized distribution of many products (based on coupons) was introduced. People were afraid of possible famine.

Serious doubts arose among Western creditors about the solvency of the USSR. The total external debt of the Soviet Union by the end of 1991 was more than $100 billion; taking into account mutual debts, the net debt of the USSR in convertible currency in real terms was estimated at about $60 billion. Until 1989, 25–30% of the amount of Soviet exports in convertible currency was spent on servicing external debt (interest payments, etc.), but then due to a sharp drop in oil exports Soviet Union To purchase the missing currency, gold reserves had to be sold. By the end of 1991, the USSR could no longer fulfill its international obligations to service its external debt. Economic reform became inevitable and vital.

Why did the nomenklatura need the restructuring and what did it actually get?

The most active part of the liberal-democratic intelligentsia were, for the most part, people associated with power.

The mass detachments of the nomenklatura itself reacted quite calmly and quite sympathetically to the “anti-communist revolution.” That is why it happened so easily, bloodlessly, at the same time it remained “half-hearted”, and for many it turned out to be a deception of their social expectations and hopes.

The nature of the nomenklatura-anti-nomenklatura revolution became absolutely obvious when everyone saw that it was the nomenclature that enriched itself before others during the division of property.

Today, the consequences of the choice made in the early nineties of this century are evident. The country is in ruins. Ethnic disputes, territorial claims, armed clashes and full-scale wars have become the nightmare reality of today. In total, during the years of Gorbachev’s “perestroika” and Yeltsin’s reforms (1985 – 1995), more than 240 bloody conflicts and wars arose on the territory of the USSR, the total number of victims of which was half a million people.

In 1990-1991, we certainly experienced a global geopolitical catastrophe. It was unexpected for most Soviet people.