Unprofitable state enterprises.

Encyclopedic YouTube

• 1 / 5

  The theory's proponents have their roots in the economic liberalization undertaken by post-war Germany in the late 1940s. During 1948, price controls and state support for enterprises were abolished in a very short time. These reforms had the effect of a starting impetus, resulting in the German economic miracle (Wirtschaftswunder). Until then, Germany had had a deeply authoritarian and interventionist government and, by getting rid of these administrative barriers “overnight,” it became an emerging market economy.

  One of the founders and main ideologists of the theory is the famous economist Jeffrey Sachs.

  Examples

  • Great Britain - Thatcherism (since 1979)
  • Germany (see above)
  • New Zealand - Rogernomics (since 1984)

  Arguments of opponents

  Main arguments of opponents:

  • High level of inflation, hyperinflation;
  • A collapse in production, mainly in high-tech areas;
  • High unemployment rate;
  • Property stratification and a sharp decline in living standards;
  • Growing social tension;
  • A crisis social sphere, a decrease in the birth rate and a sharp increase in mortality.
  • Sharp increase in crime and criminalization of the economy
  • Growth of state debt in the absence of financial resources to carry out reforms of this scale;
  • Increased political instability;
  • High dependence of the economy on foreign investment;
  • Foreign trade imbalance.

  Examples

  • Russia (see below)

  Shock therapy in different countries

  Based on past successful experience, at the dawn of the 1990s, D. Sachs recommended that new macro-economies in transition (countries of Eastern Europe, the former USSR and Latin America) also completely release all prices, eliminate subsidies, sell state property and introduce a free, floating exchange rate currencies to shake up the economic lethargy of the communist era. The shock took the form of sudden and radical changes in the structure and incentives of these macro-economies. As a result, Poland and other states of Eastern Europe reached the level economic development, meeting the requirements for entry into the European Union. Macroeconomics former USSR and Latin America had mixed success.

  Bolivia

  Israel (1985-1999)

  Poland

  Russia (1992-1998)

  Radical economic reforms in Russia began on January 2, 1992. They were carried out by a team, shock therapy implemented in Russia (maximum liberalization economic activity, arbitrary distribution of state property, financial stabilization due to strict restrictions aggregate demand) led to the creation of a wretched quasi-market system, the features of which were:

  unprecedented naturalization economic activity, sustained significant excess interest rate level of return on capital in real sector and the inevitable orientation of the entire economy under these conditions towards financial and trade speculation and the plundering of previously created wealth, a chronic fiscal crisis caused by the emergence of a “bad sequence”: “budget deficit - reduction in government spending - decline in production and increasing non-payments - reduction in tax revenues - budget deficit "

  "Shock therapy" and its historical consequences. Discussions surrounding this phenomenon.

  "Shock therapy" - propaganda (newspaper) name, with the light hand of some publicists stuck to the policy that the reformist government of Yeltsin-Gaidar began to pursue upon coming to power politicsstabilization of the economy. (Russia's attempt to move to a Market Economy)

  They usually say that the content of the reform: liberalization, price liberation, but it was complex in nature:

  • Price release(though not all of them; unfortunately, it did not apply to fuel and energy resources)
  • enterprises were given the right to independently sell products and purchase raw materials and components;
  • trading enterprises were allowed to use negotiated prices for all types of goods and services;
  • enterprises and firms received the right to carry out foreign trade operations (subject to certain rules and restrictions);
  • government bodies logistics began to turn into trade and intermediary organizations interested in providing enterprises with everything they need;
  • were allowed private trade and the activities of non-state trade and purchasing organizations.
  • Presidential Decrees were adopted on the abolition of restrictions on wages, on social partnership, on a single economic space and a number of others;
  • financial stabilization by limiting budgetary spending and contraction of the money supply.

  Historical implications:

  • planning and distribution system collapsedcontrol systemthe economy collapsed.
  • the country has not yet become a market one, of course, but has made a decisive step in this direction.
  • All this dramatically changed the life of the country’s population, and not for the better, as it increased decline in production (started back in 1990-91),price releaseled to increased inflation , hundreds of thousands of people have lost their jobs due to multiplereduction in military orders.
  • depletion of investments with the consequent erosion of fixed capital and large-scale “flight” of savings;
  • rising unemployment and huge levels of underemployment along with non-payment wages;
  • little remains of social security;
  • “shock therapy” destroyed the institutions of the socialist economy, but did not create the institutions of the market economy;
  • “Shock therapy” caused fierce resistance in the parliament elected in Soviet times and among the Soviet institutional nomenklatura, the majority of which remained in their seats;
  • on the contrary, the masses of workers showed long-suffering and faith in the success of the reforms: only isolated, sparsely attended rallies were observed on Russian territory, and the promised popular unrest did not occur;
  • After the VI Congress of People's Deputies, held in early April 1992, “shock therapy” was curtailed. As a result, Russia moved into the category of those post-socialist countries that carried out market reforms in a gradual, gradualist manner (see. Gradualism
  • Some note the advantage of such an economy: the refusal of government. price regulation.

  Opinions and discussions:

  • According to the academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences A. D. Nekipelova , shock therapy implemented in Russia led to the creation of a wretchedquasi-market system, the features of which were:

  unprecedented naturalization of economic activity, a persistent significant excess of the interest rate in the level of return on capital in the real sector and the inevitable orientation of the entire economy under these conditions towards financial and trade speculation and the dissipation of previously created wealth, a chronic fiscal crisis caused by the emergence of a “bad sequence”: “ budget deficit reduction in government spending decline in production and growing arrears reduction in tax revenues budget deficit.”

  • Why did liberalization succeed in Poland, but not in Russia? (opinion of Yavlinsky G.)

  In Poland, price liberalization worked because collectivization was not carried out there. There were large state-owned agricultural enterprises, but there were also private farms and, to a large extent, private ownership of land. And after prices were released, many private farms immediately entered the market directly, without any intermediaries. And therefore liberalization only initially led to a large surge in prices, and then inflation began to gradually decline.

  • According to the West, Russia noun. the following obstacles:corruption, prohibitive level of taxation, unproductive labor of workers, communication problems, lack of financial and other institutions of market infrastructure, stable " environment" For entrepreneurial activity.

  "SHOCK THERAPY" CONSEQUENCE FOR ECONOMY OF RUSSIA

  Subkhonberdiev A.Sh. Ph.D., Associate Professor Orazgulyeva A.A. st-ka gr. ME2-123-OB., Saiyan T.S. station gr.ME2-123-OB., Voronezh State Forestry Academy

  DOI: 10.12737/2338

  Abstract: Shock therapy - economic theory, as well as a set of radical economic reforms based on this theory. These reforms, as declared by the postulates “ shock therapy", "...aimed at improving the state's economy and bringing it out of the crisis.

  Summary: Shock Therapy - economic theory, as well as a set of radical economic reforms based on this theory. These reforms, as declared by the postulates of the

  "shock therapy", "...aimed at reviving the economy of the state and its withdrawal from the crisis.

  Key words: shock therapy, inflation, unemployment, economic crisis.

  Keywords: shock therapy, inflation, unemployment and economic crisis.

  A crisis situation developed in the consumer market and finance (including due to the decline in world oil prices by the early 1980s). Economic stagnation was accompanied by a large share of military expenditures in the budget (45% of funds were spent on the military-industrial complex) and a low standard of living.

  The formation of the private sector in the economy was facilitated by the “Law on Cooperation” and “Law on Individual Labor Activity” adopted in 1988.

  In the summer of 1990, instead of accelerating, a course towards transition to market economy, scheduled for 1991, at the end of the 12th Five-Year Plan (1985-1990). At the center of scientific discussions were radical reform options, one of which is known as the “500 Days Program”, developed by the group of G. Yavlinsky and M. Zadornov, following the example of the Polish “shock therapy”. The following were planned step by step: the transfer of enterprises to forced lease, large-scale privatization and decentralization of the economy, the introduction of anti-monopoly legislation, the removal state control above prices, allowing for a decline in basic industries economy, regulated unemployment and inflation in order to dramatically restructure the economy. It should be noted that this project has not received official support. In December 1990, the government of N.I. Ryzhkov was dismissed. The Council of Ministers of the USSR was transformed into the Cabinet of Ministers of the USSR, headed by Prime Minister V.S. Pavlov. The activities of the Cabinet of Ministers in 1991 were reflected in a doubling of prices, as well as the exchange of 50 and 100 ruble banknotes for new banknotes ( Currency reform Pavlova). The exchange was carried out over only 3 days on January 23-25, 1991 and with serious restrictions.

  This was explained by the fact that shady businessmen allegedly accumulated huge sums in large banknotes. The USSR economy in 1991 was experiencing deep crisis, which was expressed in an 11% decline in production, a 20-30% budget deficit, and a huge external debt of 103.9 billion dollars. In the new Russian economy, on January 1, 1992, the “shock therapy” model was practically implemented. The government, headed by E.T. Gaidar, acted following the example of Polish reformers who carried out radical economic reforms from January 1990. The attractiveness of “shock therapy” was seen in the ability to quickly form market relations, completely destroy the remnants of a planned economy and create conditions for economic growth. Completion of all stages of the reform was planned by the end of 1995. In reality, everything turned out to be far from what was expected.

  The “shock therapy” model included three main components: immediate price liberalization, strict monetary policy and mass privatization of state-owned enterprises. The result was a sharp rise in prices, a deep decline in production, partial destruction of scientific potential, a decrease in investment activity, inflation, unemployment, a reduction in social guarantees for the population, etc. Negative trends in the economy caused by reforms have not been overcome to this day. Index consumer prices from 1992 to 1995 increased 1187 times, and nominal wages - 616 times. Tariffs for freight transportation increased over those years by 9.3 thousand times, and the product sales price index Agriculture by product manufacturers increased by only 780 times, 4.5 times less than in industry. Foreign loans received by Russia to transform and stabilize the economy were an important means of balancing the budget.

  The privatization carried out removed a significant part of the property from state control, and at the same time the financing of public expenditures was reduced. IN developed countries on average, state-owned enterprises account for less than 7% of GDP, in developing countries approximately 11% of GDP. What is important is not the formal transfer of property title, but a real change in economic behavior, which depends on macroeconomic stability, the creation legal system, compliance with budget constraints for all economic agents. The structure of industrial production has changed over the years of transformation. There was a decline in high-tech industries, technical degradation of the economy, and the collapse of modern technologies. The decline in production in Russia, in its scale and duration, significantly exceeded all peacetime crises known in history. In mechanical engineering, industrial construction, light industry, food industry and many other important industries, production decreased by 4-5 times, costs for Scientific research and design developments - 10 times. The main source of export income was raw materials.

  During the transition to a market economy, a labor market appeared and unemployment increased. In 1992, prices soared 26 times, and in 1993 - 10 times. The ratio between household expenditure and income fell from 87.4% to 79.2%. The first impetus for inflation came from the release of prices from administrative regulation in January 1992, when enterprises sharply increased prices by 5 times. Wage growth was twice as slow as price growth, money supply increased even more slowly. Demand for goods fell sharply, which caused a reduction in production. About 80% wholesale prices and 90% retail prices were spared government regulation. But the state left control over prices for milk, bread, public transport. At the same time, wage liberalization begins and freedom is introduced retail. Reforms were initiated at the federal level, and price controls were exercised at the local level. Therefore, local authorities wanted to maintain this control, despite the government's refusal to subsidize such regions.

  Inflation was stopped in 1996-1997. And in January 1998, the Central Bank and the Russian government carried out a redenomination of the ruble. One new ruble became equal to 1000 old rubles. Boris Yeltsin said that replacing old banknotes with new ones will make people’s lives easier; it will be easier for them “without extra zeros.” He expressed confidence that Russian ruble will be no less respected currency than the Russian gold ruble was at the end of the 19th century. On August 17, 1998, Russia collapses financial system. Prime Minister S. Kiriyenko declares default on external debts and devaluation of the ruble. The ruble exchange rate against the dollar falls 4 times. The default forces the Russian authorities to work in emergency mode and try to correct their image by all available means.

  In January 1992, the “government of young reformers” headed by E.T. Gaidar began implementing radical market reforms, called “shock therapy.” The situation in Russia required urgent drastic changes: the country's foreign exchange reserves were depleted, gold reserves decreased almost 10 times, foreign debts exceeded $70 billion, the ruble exchange rate was rapidly falling, inflation was more than 20%, and the threat of famine was becoming real.
  Under these conditions, President Boris Yeltsin, who recently took office, decides to move to a market economy as soon as possible. Yeltsin's competence and professionalism causes a lot of controversy among modern historians. His reforms and their consequences turned out to be just as controversial. Nothing other than the complete lack of understanding on the part of the Gaidar government and the president himself about economic situation in Russia, it can be explained that essentially good transformations led the country to the brink of a social and economic catastrophe, the consequences of which have not yet been fully overcome.

  “Shock therapy” involved three main steps:

  Liberalization of prices.
  Voucher privatization, the program of which was developed by A.B. Chubais. Its essence was that Russian citizens received vouchers, that is, privatization checks, for the share of state enterprises.
  Conversion of the military-industrial complex. The transfer of military enterprises to the production of civilian products was supposed to help overcome the deficit in a short time and create the quantity of household goods necessary for the country.
  On paper, this plan looked clear and quite feasible, but preventing it from being implemented at once, trying to build in a bloodless country what the strongest powers had been building for decades was a fatal mistake of Yeltsin and his associates.
  Waking up on the morning of January 1, after New Year's Eve 1992, Russians were surprised to find an abundance of scarce goods on the usually half-empty store shelves. But people’s refrigerators remained empty... Prices soared as quickly as such long-awaited products appeared on the shelves. The money literally turned into a useless pile of paper overnight. This phenomenon is called hyperinflation. It was just one of the catastrophic consequences of the new economic policy- “shock therapy”. This name more than justified itself: the people could not recover from the shock for a long time. The “shock therapy” policy led to a sharp drop in incomes, and bank deposits and savings simply depreciated, resulting in a drop in the standard of living of the population. Many families found themselves below the poverty line. This explains the decline in the birth rate in Russia in the nineties, which led the country to a “demographic hole”, which experts called the “Russian cross”. Uncontrolled price release led to a jump in prices for public utilities, shrinking domestic consumer market, rising prices wholesale market. Prices for goods from industrial enterprises and agricultural products have risen. Liberalization foreign economic activity made imports the basis of the Russian market. The quality of imported goods left much to be desired, and many domestic producers could not withstand the competition and were forced to cease their activities, which significantly worsened the unemployment situation.
  Another sad result of “shock therapy” is the “gangster spring” in Russia. National wealth ended up in the hands of a narrow circle of large entrepreneurs - oligarchs, and the proceeds from their sale flowed uncontrollably into foreign banks, which only intensified the crisis in the country. Enterprises were plundered and sold, and the people who worked there found themselves on the street without a penny in their pockets. The state created a market system without providing it with the necessary legal framework and did not create appropriate clear taxation. Vouchers, which were designed to ensure some kind of fairness in the distribution of state property, became the subject of various frauds and deceptions. Desperate people, left without work and livelihoods, became easy money for scammers, so-called financial pyramids, the most famous of which is MMM. The result of participation in such scams was tragic - hundreds of suicides among people who lost not only their last savings, but also gave their only home into the hands of scammers. Racketeering, gangster shootouts, and the elimination of bad competitors have become a constant feature new Russia. Not only entrepreneurs suffered from lawlessness, but also those who had nothing much to take from. Ordinary citizens were afraid to go out into the streets and leave their homes unattended. The number of robberies and murders has increased tenfold.
  Of course, one cannot deny the positive results of “shock therapy” in Russia. Voucher privatization became the basis for the formation of a layer of medium-sized and private entrepreneurs, helped some sections of society improve their financial condition, reduced the unemployment rate. The total shortage was eliminated, essential household goods and food products became freely available, and the threat of hunger was eliminated. Reductions in arms spending freed up funds to finance light industries. “Price release” made it possible to eliminate the surplus Money in circulation. Russian market gained access to global exports, established economic ties with the advanced states of the West.
  But in comparison with the sacrifices and hardships that he experienced Russian people over the years, all the positive aspects of “shock therapy” fade, especially if you know that all this could have been avoided by spending an extra couple of years on a smooth transition to a market economy. Despite all the advantages, “shock therapy” still remains one of the most serious mistakes Russian politicians nineties.

  “Shock therapy,” which began in January 1992, was Russia's attempt to make the transition to a market economy. The corresponding program, compiled by Yegor Gaidar with the support of Western economists, World Bank and the IMF, began to be implemented soon after the collapse Soviet Union. Many of the basic "shock therapy" ideas remain valid today, despite the fact that they have been officially abandoned.

  In practice, shock therapy was a shocking failure. This also applies to its consequences for Russian economy, and the revealed emptiness of promises that its result would be a transition from a socialist to a market economy.

  Among its other consequences, American and other Western businessmen noted the obstacles that arose in the development of Russian entrepreneurship. These include: corruption, prohibitive levels of taxation, unproductive labor of workers, communication problems, lack of financial and other market infrastructure institutions, and a stable “environment” for business activity. As a result, some of the few Western firms that decided to start their activities in Russia were forced to stop.

  This article comprehensively analyzes the main elements of “shock therapy” and their disastrous consequences for the Russian economy. The following outlines an alternative approach to transition period and examines the possible role of the West in overcoming the consequences of “shock therapy” and creating predictable and stable conditions for entrepreneurial activity.

  2. The main elements of “shock therapy” and their results

  Gaidar's "shock therapy" can be described as the "SLP approach" to the transition period, since its three main elements are stabilization, liberalization and privatization. Each of these elements produced results very different from those expected by its initiators, and each made a significant “contribution” to the disasters that befell the Russian economy.

  Macroeconomic stabilization, the first component of the “SLP approach,” presupposed the establishment size limits government budget deficits and other macroeconomic policy variables. This was consistent with the practice of macroeconomic policy in the West, as well as the experience of the IMF and the World Bank in combating structural inflation in Latin America when the implementation of the stabilization program was put forward as an indispensable condition for the provision of loans. “Shock therapy,” however, did not stabilize the economy, but led to a combination of recession and inflation, which in its negative parameters goes far beyond the scope of “stagflation”, as it is interpreted in the West. The current “Russian Great Depression” is much more severe than in the United States in the 30s. From 1992 to 1996 there was a colossal decline in industrial production - by 55% compared to a decline of 35% during the “Great Depression” of 1929 - 1933. in USA. Before shock therapy, the Russian economy was the second largest in the world, ahead of Japan and Germany and second only to the United States. It currently ranks perhaps 11th or 12th, roughly on par with Brazil or Mexico. Another aspect of the failure of stabilization was the persistent high level inflation. Although it has not reached the parameters of hyperinflation (more than 50% per month), the rise in prices has been going on for so long that the ruble is virtually worthless, and the Russian economy is becoming dollarized. One current ruble is worth less than 1/2000 of the ruble of 1991, when “shock therapy” had not yet begun. This long-term inflation destroyed savings and prevented the rise of the middle class, which is the basis of any normal political and social system.

  One can note many consequences of this failure of stabilization and the associated recession and inflation. One of them is the depletion of investment with the resulting erosion of fixed capital and a large-scale “flight” of savings, far exceeding in its volume any assistance received by Russia from international institutions and Western governments. There is also rising unemployment and huge levels of underemployment along with non-payment of wages. Another consequence is expressed by a decrease real wages and living standards, leading to the impoverishment of a significant part of the population. While living standards are falling, there is little left of the social safety net; services that were previously either fully funded by the government (particularly in health and education) or heavily subsidized (including food and housing) now cost the population much more. As a result of these failures, enormous damage was caused to Russia's main assets - its human capital and natural resources. In addition, many other systems that are part of modern state, are also in a state of collapse. This concerns healthcare (life expectancy for men has fallen from more than 70 to 54 years), ecology, science and technology. The lesson to be learned from shock therapy reforms is that the economy cannot be stabilized unless the government is empowered to do so.

  Price liberalization, the second component of the “SLP approach,” was associated with the assumption that prices were set by markets rather than by administrative methods. According to the theory, if prices are formed market way, they reflect the conditions of supply and demand. In Russian reality, however, things took a completely different turn. Prices are set not so much by markets as by monopolies strengthened by privatization, mafia groups that control the most important sectors of the economy, and corrupt officials. The lesson that can be learned from this is that when prices are liberalized before privatization, the result is not efficient production, but primarily the creation of conditions for the benefit of those in power.

  Enterprise privatization, the third part of the SLP approach, meant turning state-owned enterprises into private firms, which was intended to provide positive incentives for owners, managers and workers. Russian privatization began in mid-1992. and represents one of the most comprehensive restructurings of large-scale economies. The privatization of state-owned enterprises, where the new owners are usually the old managers (“privatization for their own”), led to the emergence of private monopolies with corresponding monopolistic behavior, including price gouging. In addition, the new owners did not at all have prevailed positive incentives promoting growth in investment, production, exports, increased productivity, etc. On the contrary, negative incentives have appeared: the behavior of managers is characterized by the desire to achieve personal short-term benefits. The result was the liquidation of the firms' assets: the new owner-managers began to sell not only finished products, but also raw materials, semi-finished products, equipment, etc., and the proceeds received from these activities were sent to their personal offshore bank accounts. It should also be borne in mind that newly privatized enterprises are natural targets for extortion. Finally, these enterprises are associated with excessive taxation of everything that only the authorities can impose taxes on (hence the massive incidence of bribes paid to corrupt government officials). Existing levers legal regulation were too weak to withstand these phenomena. The corresponding lesson: carrying out privatization without proper legal regulation and an effective legal system creates incentives not for increased efficiency, but for the criminalization of the economy.

  Political crisis in Russian Federation 1992-1993 - a confrontation between two political forces: on the one hand - Russian President B.N. Yeltsin, the Council of Ministers - the Government of the Russian Federation headed by Chairman Viktor Chernomyrdin, Moscow Mayor Yuri Luzhkov and a number of regional leaders, some deputies of the Supreme Council - Yeltsin supporters; on the other hand, the leadership and most of the deputies of the Supreme Council and the Congress of People's Deputies, headed by R.I. Khasbulatov, as well as the Vice-President of Russia A.V. Rutskoy and some other representatives of the legislative branch. The culmination of the constitutional crisis was the armed bloody clash on October 3-4, 1993 in the center of Moscow and near the Ostankino television center and the subsequent assault by troops loyal to President B. N. Yeltsin of the House of Soviets of Russia, which, in total, led to casualties, including including among representatives of the civilian population.

  End of work -

  This topic belongs to the section:

  World-progressive approach. The period of feudal fragmentation in Rus'. Norman theory

  The main thing in history is the increasing development of progress leading to the absolute domination of man over nature... Marxist... gives priority in the study of progress to the development of society to social relations associated with forms of ownership..

  If you need additional material on this topic, or you did not find what you were looking for, we recommend using the search in our database of works:

  What will we do with the received material:

  If this material was useful to you, you can save it to your page on social networks:

  Tweet

  All topics in this section:

  Defeat of the Swedish invaders
  The Swedes were the first to speak. In July 1240, a Swedish fleet with an army of crusaders under the command of Earl (Duke) Birger, the king's son-in-law and the de facto ruler of the country, entered the Neva. Having passed the Neva to Ust

  Novoogoryovsky process and the collapse of the USSR
  The Novoogaryov process is the process of forming a new union treaty due to the emerging crisis between the union republics of the USSR. This process, which began in April 1991, received its

  Russia under the new political regime
  The violent outcome of the conflict between the President and Parliament determined the path further development Russia. B.N. Yeltsin had to create a democracy, but one in which the coming

  Socio-economic development of the Russian Federation during the years of President Putin
  Stabilization Fund During the presidency of Vladimir Putin, the Stabilization Fund of the Russian Federation was formed, the emergence of which became possible thanks to the beginning of the economic

  The causes and essence of the political crisis at the beginning of 1921. Decision on the transition to the NEP
  In the first half of the 20s of the 20th century, our country experienced one of the most difficult stages of its development. Soviet Russia was in a state of socio-economic and political crisis

  The essence of the NEP
  The NEP was introduced very late and in great haste, so the Bolsheviks did not have a clear plan and program of reforms in March 1921. The search for forms and methods of implementing the new course was carried out throughout

  NEP contradictions
  The development of Soviet society during the NEP period was complex and controversial. The main contradiction of the NEP is an attempt to build a planned non-market economy using a limited market mechanism.

  Industrialization of the country
  The task of forming a developed industry and implementing industrialization faced Russia even before the 1917 revolution. The first steps towards industrialization of the country were taken in the second half of the 10th century.

  Collectivization of agriculture
  December 1927 XV congress of the CPSU(b). A resolution was adopted on the issue of work in the village. Task: transition to collective cultivation of the land. March 1928 - The Central Committee of the Party, in a letter sent out to localities, demanded

  Foreign policy of the USSR in the 2nd half. 1930
  Foreign policy The USSR in Europe, starting from the second half of the 30s In the mid-30s, in the foreign policy activities of the Soviet leadership there was a departure from the principle of non-intervention

  The beginning of the Second World War
  The beginning of the war was catastrophic for the Soviet Union: 1) the surprise of the attack on June 22, 1941 allowed Hitler’s army to gain significant advantages. Many border posts and

  A turning point in the war and the defeat of Nazi Germany and Militarist Japan
  From the beginning of 1944 The Soviet army launched a powerful offensive along the entire length of the Soviet-German front. By the autumn of 1944 most of the territory of the Soviet Union (with the exception of the Baltic states) would

  Combat actions of the Soviet-German fronts 1944-1945
  Major military operations 1944–1945 Troops of the 1st and 2nd Ukrainian Fronts under the command of Generals N.F. Vatutin and I.S. Konev on January 28, 1944, ten enemy divisions were encircled

  Results and consequences of the Second World War
  Second World War was the largest and heaviest war in human history. 61 states with a population of 1.7 billion people took part in the war, and more than 50 million people died. Main

  Foreign policy of the USSR. First decade
  Victory in the Great Patriotic War and the decisive role in World War II significantly strengthened the authority of the USSR and its influence in the international arena. The USSR became one of the founders of the United Organization

  The creation of atomic weapons and the beginning of nuclear confrontation
  In the 1940s atomic weapons were created, which became a determining factor in international relations. On the territory of the USA, in Los Alamos, in 1942. The American nuclear center was created. On

  Economic development of the country in the post-war period
  After the end of the Great Patriotic War The Soviet people were given the opportunity to begin peaceful work. The main problems of the post-war period: 1) demobilization of the army: out of 11.5 million military personnel

  The situation in the country 1955-1956. Condemnation of the cult of personality
  Immediately after the death of I.V. Stalin's "Doctors' Plot" was terminated. Then the release of political prisoners began, primarily relatives and friends of the country's top leaders. Particularly in Mo

  Reforms 1960 and their inconsistency
  In fact, in the late 1940s and early 1950s, a number of Yugoslav (“Titovian”) elements began to be introduced into the USSR. economic system, officially called in the USSR "restoration of capitalism"

  Main trends 1970-1980 and the situation of the USSR
  The most important event in international life in the 1970s. The Pan-European Conference on Security and Cooperation was born. A major step in relations between the USSR and Germany was the Moscow Treaty of 1970:

  The crisis of the command-administrative system. Formation of braking mechanisms
  The features discussed above in their fullest expression were inherent in the Soviet economy of the 30-50s. In the conditions of the beginning scientific and technological revolution ineffectiveness of the team manager

  Restructuring the USSR economy. Difficulties, successes, results
  Perestroika in the country began with the preparation and implementation of reforms in all areas of socio-political, socio-economic, scientific and cultural life. These reforms were prepared from above, according to

  State Emergency Committee and attempted coup
  The State Committee for the State of Emergency (GKChP) is a self-proclaimed body in the USSR, consisting of a number of representatives of the leadership of the CPSU Central Committee and the USSR government, which carried out August 18-21