Khrushchev is a typical "Russian reformer" and a contradictory synthesis of conservatism and radicalism. Why do you say that? Is there a difference between "Russian reformers" and ordinary reformers? This should also start from the national character. The Russian nation is conservative and melancholy, and the reform behavior is incompatible with Russia. Peter the Great transformed the old Russian empire, expanded its territory, moved eastward and westward, and competed for maritime hegemony. Reform is of little significance and historical significance. And the result? After his death, all laws and regulations were abolished, and the capital still moved back to Moscow. The Russian royal family and nobles still live a conservative and decadent life, lying on the "cake" that Peter the Great fought for, drinking vodka and cursing Peter I. The lamentations of reformers are almost the same, and Catherine II continues the myth of reform. What was the result? Not to mention being vilified and attacked by the royal families in all Eastern Europe, citizens of the Russian Empire are still "eating their fill and scolding the cooks". Shang Yang, Li Kui, Wang Anshi ... Remember? Reformers often lament, and so does China. There are so many reformers in history that Deng Xiaoping has finally accumulated into a reformer. How many years will China need in 2000 and how many years will Russia need? Judging from the national character, it is estimated that it will take longer. Every reform-oriented progress of the Russian nation is only "one person's progress." From Peter the Great to Putin, Khrushchev is just a failure case in this process.
Khrushchev totally denied Stalin, which reflected the impulse of radical reform and rushed to the extreme of reform. For the Russian nation, this "overcorrection" seems to be more effective. However, he was quickly defeated by the inherent conservatism of the Russian nation and his own conservatism, and rushed to the other extreme, that is, he did nothing about the chaos and chose "shock" himself. The purpose of revising the Marxist line is to give yourself courage. For example, the Soviet Union, wearing a socialist coat, felt a little thin and dared not change clothes, so it began to pick up scissors to repair it. Khrushchev is such a "tailor", but his skill is so poor that he changed into a "beggar's costume" and made "socialism" tone change. In fact, it is better to find a new cloth and cut it before making it. At that time, * * * regarded Lenin and Stalin as pioneers and gods, so it was natural not to be insulted, so he criticized Khrushchev. I said the batch is right! But I missed the point. He should be criticized for being timid in reform, forgetting World War II and playing dead after the development of the Soviet Union, and failing to study the basic principles of Marx.
In fact, Khrushchev is not as complicated as contemporary scholars say. Who is not complicated? People are three-dimensional, who can live so flat? Khrushchev's complexity is caused by his own character and the Russian national character behind him. To say that he is complicated is to avoid the sensitive area of "socialist reform". The Soviet Union in Khrushchev's era was a failed attempt at socialist reform, and he himself was a failed designer. Khrushchev is only a case in the historical process of Soviet Russia. Further, it is a case in the development of socialist countries, which provides a typical information for many socialist countries, especially China. His failure is not only caused by personal character defects, but also a reflection of Russian national character defects. /s/blog _ 4db96ec01000act.htmlReasons for the failure of Khrushchev's reform and its evaluation.
First, the reasons for the failure of reform
1. There is no innovative scientific theory and correct guiding ideology and route. Reform involves the vital interests of the broad masses of the people and the direction and life of the country.
Therefore, it needs strong scientific macro-planning and correct guiding ideology, and has corresponding policies and supporting measures in the specific implementation and operation process.
After Khrushchev came to power, he lacked scientific understanding of the highly centralized political system and the specific national conditions of the Soviet Union, and even lacked innovative scientific theories.
Theory, so it is impossible to formulate scientific guiding ideology and line. In the specific implementation process, administrative orders are used instead of scientific methods, which determines the reform.
The incompleteness of the reform failed to touch the essence of the problem, so the reform only made minor repairs to Stalin's model and did not fundamentally break it.
Type.
2. Incomplete evaluation of Stalin's attitude leads to negative consequences. The criticism of Stalin by the 20th Congress of the Soviet Union and its consequences aroused strong opposition at home and abroad.
The ring. At home, some people enthusiastically support it, while others strongly oppose it. Internationally, it is used by capitalist countries to attack socialism.
The tools of the state and socialist system, imperialism and reactionaries of various countries have also taken this opportunity to set off a wave of anti-Soviet, anti-* * and anti-socialism. capitalism
The country's producers are at a loss, and many people "disappointed" to quit the party. The socialist countries in eastern Europe are in turmoil, and the Poznan incident and the Hungarian incident caused great turmoil.
Connection occurs. In the top leadership of the Soviet Union, some people are very worried about this and are increasingly dissatisfied with Khrushchev's internal and external policies, words and deeds. In 1957,
There is also the so-called "anti-party clique incident" against Khrushchev. These are very unfavorable to the reform of the Soviet Union.
3. The reform did not touch the basic framework of the original system. In the reform of industrial management system, Khrushchev first adopted the methods of streamlining management institutions and reducing redundant staff.
Measures for decentralization of personnel and enterprises. 1957 In the spring, the management system of industry and construction industry was further reorganized, but this industrial reorganization did not change the country and enterprises.
Affiliation, enterprises still have no operational autonomy, but it has led to the rise of localism, making the national economy out of control and industrial growth showing a downward trend.
. This kind of system reform is not successful. It just replaced another kind of administration with one kind of administration, and did not touch the highly centralized planning management system itself.
. In agriculture, the compulsory sales system of agricultural products was abolished, tractor stations were reorganized into technical repair stations, and all agricultural machinery was sold to collective farms.
This structural reform itself has positive significance, combining workers with advanced technologies and tools, thus promoting the development of productive forces. But because ...
Take a "one size fits all" approach in a short time, and the result will go to the opposite side.
4. The reform lacks the spirit of seeking truth from facts and puts forward unrealistic slogans. Khrushchev started from his subjective desire to increase agricultural investment.
Large-scale reclamation and planting of corn were carried out under the original planned economic management system. It was quite effective at the beginning of land reclamation, but its disadvantages were exposed in the early 1960 s.
It not only wastes a lot of manpower and material resources, but also encourages extensive farming. The food problem has not been fundamentally solved, and what is more serious is that the ecological balance has been destroyed and reclaimed.
The fruits of famine have not been consolidated. For the cultivation of corn, many areas in the Soviet Union are not suitable for planting because of natural conditions, and the "corn movement" is very fast
Ended in failure. In the early 1960s, agricultural reform was in a state of total failure, which did great harm to the national economy and people's livelihood.
At the same time, unrealistic slogans also brought great harm to the Soviet Union. On the occasion of celebrating the 40th anniversary of the October Revolution, Khrushchev formally proposed its adoption.
After "peaceful competition", we will not only surpass the United States in per capita product output in the next 15 years. At the 2nd1Congress of the Soviet Union, he announced ".
Socialism has achieved complete victory in our country, and Soviet countries have entered the period of "building a large-scale socialist society".
In the new "Soviet Program" and "Soviet Constitution" adopted by the 22nd National Congress of the Soviet Union, it is also declared that the Soviet Union will basically build a "capitalist society" within 20 years.
"The dictatorship of the proletariat is no longer necessary in the Soviet Union", the Soviet Union "has become a country of the whole people" and the Soviet Union "has become a party of the whole people". this
This unrealistic slogan, with great recklessness and impatience, caused great confusion in China.
5. Be arbitrary and engage in personality cult. Shortly after Khrushchev came to power, the power of the Soviet Party and government was concentrated on him, and so was Khrushchev's personality worship.
Yes, on his 70th birthday, the Soviet Union almost repeated the scene of Stalin's 50th birthday in 1929. Later, the Soviet Central Committee was in charge of Khrushchev.
It's hard to say: "Soviet newspapers indulged in reporting Khrushchev's activities more and more frequently, praised him greatly, and published his articles in 1963 national newspapers."
120 photos, the first nine months 1964 to 140 photos. In contrast, the giant photos of Stalin are extreme, only 10- 15 times a year. "
The result of this arbitrariness and cult of personality is trampling on democratic centralism, undermining the socialist legal system and affecting the process and depth of reform, which has not been carried out.
Substantial progress was finally dismissed by Su * * *.
The reform during Khrushchev's administration was only minor repairs within the framework of the original system and was deeply rooted in the Soviet Union.
This determines that this reform must be incomplete. In addition, Khrushchev's reform lacks correct guiding ideology and is subjective and impatient.
Lacking the style of seeking truth from facts, some unrealistic slogans and goals were put forward, and many reform measures were quickly introduced without demonstration and test, which led to the creation.
Fall into chaos, leading to the failure of reform.
Second, the evaluation of Khrushchev's reform
Positive side
(1) Khrushchev's criticism of Stalin broke the superstition of Stalin objectively, and also broke through the imprisonment of dogmatism, and was liberated to a certain extent.
People's ideological and political rehabilitation of false and wrongful cases, rehabilitation of persecutors, and creation of favorable articles for the reform and construction of the Soviet Union and the socialist countries in Eastern Europe.
Pieces.
(2) Solving the food problem is quite realistic and meets the social needs of the Soviet Union. Measures such as reducing agricultural tax in agricultural reform have historical progress.
In industry, he took some measures to simplify administration and decentralization and streamline management institutions, which left valuable experience for the reform of socialist countries.
(3) The reform of the Soviet Union has promoted the reform of other socialist countries, and the economies of some countries have developed to varying degrees, and socialist countries are moving towards it.
From a more realistic standpoint of world politics, countries are beginning to realize that there are many models for building socialism, which are beneficial to the development of socialism.
The negative side
(1) Khrushchev lacked a scientific understanding of the "Stalin model", the reform lacked rational thinking, was arbitrary, and was eager for success and ignored it.
Objective reality and objective laws. Most of its reform measures are piecemeal, which fails to go deep into this institutional model, so it cannot be compared with the old one.
Breaking the pattern can't stop the revival of Stalin's phenomenon. After a period of partial reform, the traditional system was finally maintained.
(2) Khrushchev, as a man in Stalin's era, was limited by his ideological level, and his exposure and criticism of personality cult was superficial, and his roots were not investigated from the system.
The lack of analysis of the unified leadership system is more a criticism of Stalin's personal moral faults, which makes his criticism incomplete. This practice has aroused people.
Confused. In addition, under the pattern of the Cold War between the East and the West, the excessive denial of Stalin objectively aggravated the vicious wave of anti-Soviet and anti-* * in the West.
/course/Lishi/article/235241.aspx Du Nan: Russian media reported that the descendants of Yeltsin and Gorbachev were very rich, while the descendants of Khrushchev were much more ordinary?
A: Yes. Their descendants are famous. They got wealth when they were in power, but we are not famous. We just happened to be born in this family. My great-grandfather stepped down long ago, and we all work and live by ourselves. Everyone has his own job, not by family wealth. When my grandfather was in power, national leaders gave gifts to each other, such as gold bracelets, and my great-grandmother often returned valuable things to others, leaving only some cheap things. Our descendants depend on themselves, unlike the descendants of other leaders, and can open their parents' foundations.
Du Nan: Are you close relatives? Is anyone involved in politics?
Nina: We are a big family, not very close, but not too close. I went to new york to see my uncle once. Everyone else is a scientist. It seems that I am the only one studying politics.
Du Nan: 1999, 64-year-old Sergei Khrushchev (Hector's son, former Soviet missile expert, turned to study the history of the cold war) was sworn in as an American citizen. In an interview, he said, "The world has changed, and I hope he (father) will agree with my decision." You 199 1 studied at purington University in the United States, 1998 the Soviet Union declared its disintegration. Can you tell me about the choice of leaving the motherland at that time?
Nina: It's our choice. It doesn't matter where we live, what matters is the geographical difference. I think in an open society, national boundaries are not so important and people can move freely. His joining the United States is a great event. For a long time, Khrushchev's descendants were very low-key and cautious, fearing that worse things would happen.
Now in America, I live my own life, and no one cares that I am a descendant of Khrushchev. I gave lectures and published articles before I started to mention that Khrushchev was my great-grandfather, and no one would pay special attention to these. I love my present life.
/culture/people/22/t 200703 22 _ 10779955 _ 3。 Shtml19611kloc-0/8 Khrushchev Reform /4 1068. 1307k6vu0011246.html Russian scholars' latest comments on Khrushchev and their reflections/qk/81866x/20050011.
Ten years after Stalin's death, Khrushchev made unprecedented contributions: Re-evaluation of Khrushchev by Soviet academic circles /book/ 10275086/
Comprehensive evaluation of Khrushchev's life, the contribution is greater than the past.