Dominic Zagara Gadel IB Euro 5/26/2014 Why Communism doesn’t work! Featuring East Germany and Poland East Germany and Poland both had numerous factors, both short-term and long term that led to the fall of communism. The oppressive rule of Erich Honecker led to disintegration from communism in East Germany, whereas in Poland, Lech Walesa and Gorbachev’s loosening of Russian Enforcement led to its disintegration. In East Germany, a Chancellor, Erich Honecker, rose to power and employed harsh, repressive methods. In addition, the berlin Wall was in the construction process, increasing the cultural divide between eastern and western Europe along the Iron Curtain.
How far do you agree with the view that the Cold War came to an end because of mounting economic pressure on the Soviet Union during the 1980s? There were numerous factors that led to the end of the Cold War; amongst them economic pressure can be considered a more significant one. Supporting communist regimes in Eastern Europe had become an economic liability like Cuba, Vietnam and Afghanistan had been in the past. In the 80’s approximately $40 billion was being spent annually, which was draining the USSR’s economy, hence it can be said that the end came about partially due to mounting economic pressures. However, other factors such as: people power, role of the Pope, Gorbachev and Reagan must not be overlooked - as mentioned by Williamson ‘breaking the Soviet economy was a lobby not a strategy.’ By 1980’s it was evident that Eastern Europe was unable to compete with the West in terms of industrial production or arms, as the ‘Soviet bloc was suffering a steady economic, ideological, moral and cultural decline.’ (Williamson source 10) The decline of the Soviet Union was due to ‘its own economic inefficiencies and inability to match the West’s economic growth,’ Williamson highlights the economic pressures USSR faced and therefore backs up the statement that the war came to an end as a result of this.
The reason why this role is taken away from governments is that they are obstacles to a nation’s development because they are inefficient and corrupt systems. A trend towards Neoliberalism began as early as the 1970s as a direct attack on the Keynesian ideology. The ideology came to the forefront of politics when both Prime Minister of England, Margaret Thatcher and President of the United States, Ronald Reagan implemented Neo-Liberal policies. While the practice of Neoliberalism can be seen in many countries, like other ideologies it is not without flaws; however, these flaws greatly outweigh the positives that occur through its practice. Therefore, Neoliberalism is an ineffective Pro-Market approach to development that contributes to inequality and causes more harm than good for both the global south and north.
Competition of the United States was causing the Soviets to spend a lot of money (Miller, The U.S.S.R. in 1991). The communists began printing more money, causing inflation to increase (Miller, The U.S.S.R. in 1991). When consumers had money to buy food, they were not able to purchase any, because there was not much food for them to purchase (Miller, The U.S.S.R. in 1991). Reagan’s sabotages were also putting them deeper in debt during the
The four main reasons for the collapse of the empire are Economics. Power (Army), Religion and Power (Emperor). The first reason for the collapse of the empire is Economics. I can support this as the roman emperors spent a lot of money on showing off to others, making others feel jealous and for their own pleasure. Some of the things they spent it on were golden statues of themselves, banquets that were very expensive and clothes made out of the finest, unique fabrics instead of trying to develop the infrastructure of Rome.
This proved to be a vital factor in the ending of the Cold War however it is by no means the only one; indeed a variety of different factors ultimately caused the collapse of the USSR in 1991 and thus the end of the Cold War. The economic decline of the Soviet Union over the 1980s was an essential reason for the end of the Cold War. Various factors explain the Soviet Union’s economic crisis which led to its collapse. The Soviet soft power (that is to say its political, social and culture influence) was undercut by the exposure of Stalin's crimes in 1956 and by the repression in Hungary in 1956. Communist ideology aimed to establish justice for all, however, the lethal purges and gulags of the Stalinist era led to a general loss of confidence in the system and thus a low level of motivation in the work force.
Margaret Thatcher’s version of liberal conservatism, known as the ‘new right’, swept away the power and influence of the one nation conservatives in the party. She believed that people were naturally competitive, that private enterprise should be encouraged because it rewarded effort. There was a belief that high taxation meant that those who created wealth were penalised so that the less gifted could be subsidised. Her supporters were strong believers in the individual, yet just as the liberals of the Victorian era they believed in a strong state. The new right was radical departure from traditional conservatism because the policies on society are completely different.
Hitler’s strategy incompetence, the Allied bombings and losing the Battle of The Atlantic were all also important factors in the defeat of Germany. This essay will aim to judge to what extent the failings of the economy contributed to Germany’s defeat in conjunction with various other factors that led to the downfall of Germany. The Nazi’s economic policy did nevertheless, have significant contribution to the defeat and fall of Germany during the war. The Four-Year Plan of 1936, which was major part of their economic policy, was meant to make Germany ‘fit for war within four years’. However, the German economy was not really ready for a long war and was struggling by 1939; its capacity was only strong enough to sustain a couple of short campaigns.
This shows that Alexander was ready to liberate Russia because even though it was risky, it helped to start the liberalisation process because it enabled ex-serfs to work in factories which would help boost the economy, let the gentry to earn their own money and would help advances in industry which in turn help Russia to compete with the western world. However the aftermath of this manifesto was a lot more negative than first appears. Although Alexander helped to abolish Serfdom there were a lot of negatives
The main reason for the Marshall Plan as a turning factor was in its forthrightness. It can be seen as the United States throwing down an economic gauntlet to the Soviet Union, challenging its authority in Eastern Europe by offering economic aid to countries under the USSR. Despite altruistic claims of helping states grow, the United States was really engaging in dollar diplomacy, attempting to harness the developing economies for their own use. Due to the continual expansion of their own economy, the Americans needed to find emerging markets through which they could both import and export goods, and found them in the Eastern European states. This, however, was seen by the Soviet Union as a form of economic expansion through which the Americans were bringing Eastern European states into their own sphere of influence, and was a direct challenge to their authority.