http://cluborlov.blogspot.com/2009/02/social-collapse-best-practices.html
Someone named Orlov says in the essay linked above: When the Soviet system went away, many people lost their jobs, everyone lost their savings, wages and pensions were held back for months, their value was wiped out by hyperinflation, there shortages of food, gasoline, medicine, consumer goods, there was a large increase in crime and violence, and yet Russian society did not collapse. Somehow, the Russians found ways to muddle through. How was that possible? It turns out that many aspects of the Soviet system were paradoxically resilient in the face of system-wide collapse, ^^^^^ CB: Evidently, the SU had more of a grass roots and democratic society , working class people's world there all along than a lot of observers and critics, West and East , thought. Was this a paradox or was it proof that working people ran things more than critics claimed ? That the author evidently didn't expect this, suggests he didn't quite understand fully what was going on "at the base" of his country. ^^^^^ many institutions continued to function, and the living arrangement was such that people did not lose access to food, shelter or transportation, and could survive even without an income. The Soviet economic system failed to thrive, and the Communist experiment at constructing a worker's paradise on earth was, in the end, a failure. ^^^^^ CB: Or maybe the collapse of the Soviet state was the state whithering away, as Marx prognosticated. And what is left is closer to the free association of free producers, or whatever, Since Marx didn't predict a "workers paradise", maybe this author is looking for the wrong thing, and what is there is closer to what Marx envisioned than he thinks. Since the collapse of the Soviet state, I've always been interested in the reports like this one that people continued to survive "without income" or wages. That means that the money system, the wage system went "poof" ! That's what is supposed to happen in communism. Very interesting. ^^^^^^ But as a side effect it inadvertently achieved a high level of collapse-preparedness. ^^^^^^ CB: Maybe it wasn't so inadvertent. Maybe the big ,bad Soviet state was a protective, scary mask worn to ward off the vicious imperialist system, and the real future society was grown on purpose underneath, with hardy roots. It is not likely an accident that the society he describes survived and functions. You can be sure that they are growing a lot of local food in gardens. ^^^^^ In comparison, the American system could produce significantly better results, for time, but at the cost of creating and perpetuating a living arrangement that is very fragile, and not at all capable of holding together through the inevitable crash. Even after the Soviet economy evaporated and the government largely shut down, Russians still had plenty left for them to work with. ^^^^^ CB: My estimate is that he is mistaken that this was "inadvertent". It was not a paradise, but it was a place where the working class was empowered and running their own lives. ^^^^^^ And so there is a wealth of useful information and insight that we can extract from the Russian experience, which we can then turn around and put to good use in helping us improvise a new living arrangement here in the United States – one that is more likely to be survivable. ^^^^^^ CB: Hopefully. But unfortunately, we don't have socialism, and they did. _______________________________________________ Marxism-Thaxis mailing list Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis
