Was Brezhnev responsible for the fall of USSR?

**~~BlackPirate~~** · February 26, 2010, 10:07 PM

Usually people tend to blame Gorbachev for the dissolution of USSR.But after i read Brezhnev's biography i realised that actually he was the primary responsible for this.During his period USSR faced an economic decline that torpedoed her position as a global superpower.Brezhnev did nothing to correct the economic problems that occured.He was responsible for the start of the catastrophic Afghan war.He ruled despite the fact that his health was in severe decline(in the end i think he was in a coma).He even awarded himself with a series of Medals without deserving them(just because he liked to be remembered in history as the man with the most decorations).I have a sense that his was the King Luis XV of USSR

**Nikitn** · February 27, 2010, 04:56 AM

Nah. Solving these problems would mean instability and chaos - as well as severe unpopularity for him. He didn't have the balls. In return the Brezhnev era is known as an era of stability and good life in USSR.

Gorbachev tried to solve the problems, but he and his ilk were simply too incompetent.

**CarbEast** · February 27, 2010, 05:48 AM

Yes and no. Yes, because most of the severe problems complicated to the point of no return during the time when he was (formally) in charge. No, because the political system left after Stalin and Khrushchev was fundamentally longterm non-sustainable. It degraded with time, producing less and less competent politics one after the other, with naive Gorbachev being the "finest creation" of that system. Brezhnev was just a step in the same (degrading) direction.

**Monarchist** · February 27, 2010, 05:58 AM

Left-wing politics were responsible for the fall of the C.C.C.P. Everywhere it goes, in its various disguises, Marxism ruins nations. Nothing can ever allow that corrupt philosophy to succeed for more than two generations. The U.S.S.R. sewed the seeds of its destruction in 1917 by existing.

**justicar5** · February 27, 2010, 08:30 AM

Originally Posted by Monarchist

Left-wing politics were responsible for the fall of the C.C.C.P. Everywhere it goes, in its various disguises, Marxism ruins nations. Nothing can ever allow that corrupt philosophy to succeed for more than two generations. The U.S.S.R. sewed the seeds of its destruction in 1917 by existing.

totalitarian idelogies in general do, be they autocratic monarchies, facist right wing dictatorships Thoecracies or communist dictatorships.

oh btw monarchy is as evil as the other 3, and ruined the world for millennia, destroying progress until the renaisance bought back some small islands of democracy and allowed progress to restart.

Keep comparing social-democracy to communism and I will compare your conservatism to facism, if you find being called a facist untrue and offensive then you will see how I find being called a communist.

**CarbEast** · February 27, 2010, 08:51 AM

Originally Posted by justicar5

totalitarian idelogies in general do, be they autocratic monarchies, facist right wing dictatorships Thoecracies or communist dictatorships.

Even though USSR was totalitarian only when Stalin was in charge. Monarchies are very rarely totalitarian, while Theocracies usually are.

Or maybe you was using the term "totalitarian" just as replacement for "very very very bad"?

**Xanthippus of Sparta** · February 27, 2010, 02:46 PM

I would say that Brezhnev was the main architect behind the fall too. By the time Gorbachev came to power Afganistan was a mess, the Soviet economy was in shambles, and most of Eastern Europe was beginning its sucessful push to throw out the Communists.

Originally Posted by Monarchist

Left-wing politics were responsible for the fall of the C.C.C.P. Everywhere it goes, in its various disguises, Marxism ruins nations. Nothing can ever allow that corrupt philosophy to succeed for more than two generations. The U.S.S.R. sewed the seeds of its destruction in 1917 by existing.

Explain the existence of Communist Cuba and North Korea to the present day. Go.

**Heathen Hammer** · February 27, 2010, 08:35 AM

I would say the whole "policies of contradictions" that started since 1960s. But out of all USSR leaders Brezhnev was the most rational one. Most of people from USSR remember times of him in the office as times of stability and prosperity.

**Nikitn** · February 27, 2010, 09:14 AM

Originally Posted by Volh Vseslavich

I would say the whole "policies of contradictions" that started since 1960s. But out of all USSR leaders Brezhnev was the most rational one. Most of people from USSR remember times of him in the office as times of stability and prosperity.

Khruschev was the best leader of USSR.

**Heathen Hammer** · February 27, 2010, 09:40 AM

Originally Posted by Kirov123

Khruschev was the best leader of USSR.

He wasn't as bad as Gorbachev, but definitely not the best one. I
He ruined Soviet relations with China, reformed army conscription (which led to emergence of dedovshina), etc. He made some good things (first man in space, support to Vietnam, etc), but still he can hardly be called the best leader.

**Frankie88** · February 27, 2010, 10:27 AM

Originally Posted by Volh Vseslavich

He wasn't as bad as Gorbachev, but definitely not the best one. I
He ruined Soviet relations with China, reformed army conscription (which led to emergence of dedovshina), etc. He made some good things (first man in space, support to Vietnam, etc), but still he can hardly be called the best leader.

Hardly. Especialy with his role in Stalins purges in mind.

**Heathen Hammer** · February 27, 2010, 10:31 AM

Originally Posted by Frankie88

Hardly. Especialy with his role in Stalins purges in mind.

Exactly. Although it didn't stop him from becoming radically anti-stalinist right after he came to power after Stalin's death.

**Nikitn** · February 27, 2010, 03:06 PM

Originally Posted by Volh Vseslavich

He wasn't as bad as Gorbachev, but definitely not the best one. I
He ruined Soviet relations with China, reformed army conscription (which led to emergence of dedovshina), etc. He made some good things (first man in space, support to Vietnam, etc), but still he can hardly be called the best leader.

No. China was ruled by a Stalinist fool. If Khruschev crushed Stalinism in USSR, obviously the Chinese would get angry. He was defeintly the best one.

And conscription has always been in Soviet army.. The thing is, that after Khruschev things became far more liberal and the Soviet society stopped being plauged by constant fear. This was his greatest reform, along with the huge expansion of Soviet consumer goods sector.

Krhuschev cannot be given credit for the work of Soviet scientists.

Originally Posted by Frankie88

Hardly. Especialy with his role in Stalins purges in mind.

Khruschev did what he had to survive, even if this meant asslicking Stalin.

Originally Posted by Frankie88

Well I don't know about radically anti-stalinist apart from denouncing Stalin's actions and getting rid of Beria(which was more a matter of saving his own skin) he didn't persecute or even point his finger at anyone else.

Stalinism was denounced as a horrible thing, and the main criminal (Beria) left was eliminated. This is Anti Stalinism. He also exported this all over the WP.

**Frankie88** · February 27, 2010, 03:45 PM

Originally Posted by Kirov123

Khruschev did what he had to survive, even if this meant asslicking Stalin.

Khruschev did more then what was needed to survive. When Khruschev was in charge of Moscow he exceeded his execution quota and the same happened when he was in charge of Ukraine where his deportation quata was also largely exceeded. Shelepin, the KGB chief under Khruschev, even confessed in 1988 to the burning of 261 pages of Khruschevs files on his orders.

Originally Posted by Kirov123

Stalinism was denounced as a horrible thing, and the main criminal (Beria) left was eliminated. This is Anti Stalinism. He also exported this all over the WP.

Beria wasn't the main criminal even though he was scum and besides he was imprisoned and shot because the rest(Khruschev, Malenkov, Molotov etc.) feared Beria was about to seize power for himself. Kaganovich was more or less the Himmler of Russia but he was allowed a state pension and died peacefully at the age of 97.

Off-topic: Shouldn't this be in the VV.

**The Noble Lord** · March 01, 2010, 10:31 AM

Originally Posted by Volh Vseslavich

Most of people from USSR remember times of him in the office as times of stability and prosperity.

That is true, if you speak with lots of older people who lived through the 60s and 70s that would tell you that Brezhnev's time was the best time to live in the USSR. Afterwards, Andropov tried to do something positive but he was ill and passed away shortly. Chernenko did nothing, and Gorbachev brought the house down. His incompetence, naivety, shortsightedness, and sometimes stupidity was legendary. If you would blame someone for the fall of the USSR, then it's Gorbachev!

**Phier** · March 01, 2010, 02:07 PM

Originally Posted by Volh Vseslavich

I would say the whole "policies of contradictions" that started since 1960s. But out of all USSR leaders Brezhnev was the most rational one. Most of people from USSR remember times of him in the office as times of stability and prosperity.

The term 'Soviet bread line' is synonymous with his era. I think prosperity means something different over there

**CarbEast** · March 01, 2010, 02:57 PM

Originally Posted by Phier

The term 'Soviet bread line' is synonymous with his era. I think prosperity means something different over there

Actually if there was anything plenty in USSR during Brezhnev period, it was bread. You might not see quality meat or cheese or chocolate for months, but bread, milk, kefir (type of yoghurt), and certain types of fish (canned and raw) were always in abundance.

P.S. As for "lines", in USSR there was a line for everything. Not because there was shortage, just a style of work of Soviet retail LOL