Lived quietly and muffled

This is a whole era in the life of the country, and one of the longest and, to be honest, not the worst. Although, of course, there were bad things in it too. Analyzing this time, we recall the Helsinki Accords, the historic Soyuz-Apollo docking, the entry of troops into Afghanistan, the 1980 Olympics, the construction of the century, dissident processes and, of course, stagnation. Today in Pyatnitsa, eyewitnesses and experts talk about Brezhnev and his role in history.

Every person who lived in the 70-80s of the last century has his own image of that era. I also have it, and not just one, so this is an ambiguous period. The very first thing that comes to mind is the feeling: is it really going to be like this forever? Will the endless plenums and meetings in the Central Committee of the CPSU, the speeches of the dull Kremlin elders, the battles for the harvest, hockey matches on TV and queues, queues, queues never end ...

Recalls Arnold Kharitonov, famous journalist, writer:

“When Brezhnev came, we vaguely understood that they were fighting up there, and everyone thought that Brezhnev was a temporary figure. And in the end, he stayed in office until his death, 18 years. At this time, anecdotes entered our life, which never happened under Stalin and could not be. And interestingly, under Stalin everything was hidden, and under Brezhnev everyone knew everything: that he did not write the books “Small Land” and “Virgin Land” about the lovers and husbands of his daughter Galina. And one more thing: Brezhnev did not make any shocking movements. 18 years old and nothing to say. They lived quietly and muffled.

Arnold Innokentevich recalls the famous phrase: "History repeats itself twice: the first time in the form of a tragedy, the second - in the form of a farce." Undoubtedly, the Brezhnev era is a complete farce.

“Remember how he could hardly stand on his feet and could not speak. And this is his childhood love for various orders and medals! Everyone laughed at him. One day he came to Irkutsk, talked to an aircraft factory worker, and immediately this worker was given the title of Hero of Socialist Labor. I remember when he last time was shown on TV in 1982 during a visit to Baku. Together with Heydar Aliyev, they arrived at the monument to 26 Baku commissars. Aliyev held him very tightly by the arm. First, Brezhnev bowed towards the monument, then Aliev turned it around to the people, and for some reason he bowed again. Apparently, he didn’t understand what was going on.”

Just during these years, Arnold Kharitonov had a chance to work both in newspapers and on television, that is, at the forefront of the ideological front.

“Censorship was rampant. We were under two caps - the regional committee of the CPSU and the Komsomol. Behind every word, every photograph they imagined a catch, a provocation, a second meaning. Once I was called by the head of the press sector to reprimand me for a photo of a dog in a tattered vest. Like, the sailors will be indignant, how dare they put a vest on a dog - a symbol of the Soviet fleet. I was stunned: what a connection - sailors in many countries of the world wear vests, and even pirates wore them. I can tell hundreds of such cases.

Vladimir Demchikov, a blogger, publicist and impresario, recalls the numerous portraits of "dear Leonid Ilyich" and his colleagues in the Politburo, which were everywhere - from newspapers and house walls to schools and TV:

“Moreover, these images were deliberately made on the cheap. Some rags, plywood, frames for banners... Such deliberate modesty of the ubiquitous, the fragility of the unshakable. It was a little funny, a little pitiful, bewildering and perceived simply as a visual manifestation of the absurdity inherent in life. We avoided all of this."

Vladimir Sevastyanovich does not feel any emotions about that time, according to him, it was obvious that the country was simply rolling downhill by inertia.

Indeed, everything was exactly like this: plywood banners, obligation to go to demonstrations on May 1 and November 7, conversations in kitchens, jokes ... And the very image of Leonid Ilyich, who was called nothing more than a fiery Marxist-Leninist, an outstanding leader of the Communist Party and the Soviet state, the most prominent figure in the international communist and workers' movement, a tireless fighter for peace and friendship between peoples, appears through the prism of numerous anecdotes. But most importantly, no one was afraid of Brezhnev, and they were not taken seriously at all. Especially in recent years. Here it is worth remembering how he was buried, because in our country a funeral is, so to speak, the moment of truth. It is during the funeral that the true attitude of people towards a statesman is manifested. No, of course, there were official speeches, national mourning, but, to be honest, many breathed a sigh of relief, because they no longer had the strength to look at the helpless old man.

“We went to show our new film in the Nizhneudinsky district,” recalls Arnold Kharitonov, “the first secretary of the district party committee was with us. And here we are sitting in the hut, and on the radio they announce his death. I ask the secretary: “The show should probably be canceled?” He: “Why cancel? There was no team." "Well, maybe a minute of silence to announce?" - "Not. We can’t announce it ourselves, there was no team.” - “You are probably going to Nizhneudinsk now?” - "What for? After the film, let's go, have a drink, eat, and the next morning I'll go. And no one sobbed, only the watchman nailed the mourning ribbon to the flag. And when Stalin died, I remember very well, everyone was crying. Both adults and children."

Was there a stalemate?

For some, the Brezhnev era is hopeless darkness, stagnation, timelessness, while others remember this period as a time of rapid development.

“Of course, it was not stagnation,” I am sure Vladimir Aksenov, secretary of the Irkutsk Regional Committee of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation for outreach work, - there was growth in the country in all sectors. Everything is known in comparison: under him, 38 poultry farms were built in the Irkutsk region, now only three are working. As for Leonid Ilyich himself, he was a practical and completely selfless person. We evaluate it positively, although time required more. Everyone says - coupons, shortages, but I think that this was done artificially. Many of the conquests of that time were adopted by other countries, such as free medicine and education. And they still haven't given up on it."

According to Academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Director of the Limnological Institute Mikhail Grachev, under Brezhnev there was a sense of calm. Yes, there were dissidents, but the attitude towards them was more humane than under Khrushchev. The people were no longer afraid. Students hung out slogans, read samizdat.

“Someone had stagnation,” the academician says, “I didn’t have any stagnation. I generally believe that times do not choose. Of course, there was a lot of alluvial, hence the jokes. The man became old, and the environment did not want to change anything.

For Viktor Borovsky, ex-director of Irkutskenergo and chairman of the Legislative Assembly of the Irkutsk region in 2000-2002, the Brezhnev era was also not a lost time, much less stagnation, on the contrary, it was in those years that he took place as a successful head of a large enterprise.

“I can’t say anything bad about that era and about Brezhnev himself. This is the business of politicians: they wanted to change the regime, so they used the word “stagnation”. I worked at Irkutskenergo, there was rapid construction going on.”

Viktor Mitrofanovich said that at that time he worked at CHPP-9 in Angarsk. And when the problem of lack of capacity arose, he personally went to solve it in the Central Committee of the Party and the State Planning Commission, where they listened to him carefully and made a decision very quickly. That is, in those days there were no bureaucratic barriers: all issues were resolved promptly.

And another important point. At that time there were social elevators. Viktor Borovsky is a clear example of this. The son of a weaver and a military man, he had no connections at the top, but he was appointed to lead a large enterprise, and after that he was elected a deputy of the Angarsk Council people's deputies. That is, capable and active people under Brezhnev were identified and promoted. This is to the question of the supposedly existing negative selection in Soviet years, about which some publicists love to talk so much today.

Let us also recall that it was under Leonid Ilyich that science developed rapidly. Clear evidence of this is the Irkutsk science Center. Tells Vera Rogozhina, Candidate of Physical and Mathematical Sciences, Senior Researcher Institute of the Earth's Crust, People's Deputy of the USSR (1989-1991):

“I can say one thing: I worked and did not feel any stagnation. Under him, I had the opportunity to realize all my scientific tasks. Our institute developed, money was given for research as much as needed. There were prospects, no one interfered with us, we could travel in the field, we were given helicopters and equipment. Everyone got an apartment. And for free. Yes, meat stamps appeared in the early 80s. But there was a cooperative store where you could buy the same sausage, but not for 2.20, but for 5 rubles. And all the products at that time were natural: when they brought sausage, the smell stood for several hundred meters, because it was real.

We will return to the topic of coupons and total deficits, but first we need to figure out: was there a stagnation after all or not? In general, when you think about the Brezhnev era, you always experience a kind of, as they say now, a break in the pattern. Why stagnation, if it was in the 1970s that so much was built in the USSR that neither before nor after Brezhnev was built? Let us recall the all-Union shock construction projects: the Ust-Ilimskaya hydroelectric power station, BAM, KamAZ, the Druzhba oil pipeline, etc.

Word to the historian Alexander Shubin, Candidate of Sciences, Associate Professor of the East Siberian Institute of Economics and Law:

“The Brezhnev era can be divided into two periods - from 1964 to 1976 and from 1976 to 1982. The first period of his reign was successful. It was then that our economy reached high rates of development. And what is very important, for the first time in the history of the USSR, the production of consumer goods was going at a faster pace. That is, they began to produce clothes, furniture, televisions, refrigerators, etc. I remember as soon as I got married in 1979 and immediately received a warrant for an apartment, my wife and I went to the store and calmly bought a refrigerator. And before, you had to stand in line for three years.”

During this period, wages began to rise. Recall that under Khrushchev, the main incentives for increasing efficiency were certificates of honor and titles.

Cash prizes were symbolic, five rubles, no more. Under Brezhnev, they began to pay the 13th salary. Enterprises have the opportunity to allocate part of the earned funds for housing construction. The foreign policy of the USSR was also successful. A cooperation agreement with the United States, the Helsinki Act, was signed. The USSR constantly came up with peace initiatives, which increased our authority in the international arena.

But it was not possible to keep this course. Late Brezhnev is the revival of imperial politics in its purest form.

We again began to spend huge amounts of money on defense, the production of tanks and weapons. The money also went to support friendly regimes in other countries. And the apotheosis of this unreasonable policy was the introduction of troops into Afghanistan. All this eventually undermined the country's economy, and we spoiled relations with the whole world. Thus, Leonid Ilyich Brezhnev is a major political figure until the mid-70s, and after - a petty politician of the era of Alla Pugacheva.

Historian, Ph.D. Sergei Schmidt managed to catch the Brezhnev era. When the General Secretary died, he was 11 years old, and he perfectly remembers both the deficit and talk about the queue, but he also remembers the rapid housing construction in Irkutsk, and the fact that the families of classmates received apartments.

“Not a single historian will deny that 18 years of Brezhnev's rule is the most peaceful period in the history of the country in the 20th century. Paradoxical as it may seem, but the Brezhnev era is actually the birth of privacy in the USSR, the formation of a new individualistic psychology, freed from Stalinist totalitarianism and the sixties "collectivism". You can talk about the Soviet deficit for a long time, but it was in the era of stagnation that the foundations of the modern consumer society and consumer psychology were formed.

Yes, the Brezhnev USSR was doomed, like any authoritarian-conservative regime. He did not much outlive his symbol and creator. An attempt to "reboot" a thoroughly frozen system led to its collapse. However, for a researcher free from the prejudices of zoological anti-Sovietism, the significance of this period in Russian history is undeniable, and Brezhnev's Soviet society is in some ways much more interesting than the Soviet society of the era of Stalin and Khrushchev.

And read and watch

Contradictions are at every turn. They say: when the scoop was strangled freedom, including creative. But for some reason, it was under Leonid Ilyich that the flowering of Soviet cinema. And the films loved since childhood, which can be watched endlessly and from any place, were created just then: “Three Poplars on Plyushchikha”, “Kalina Krasnaya”, “Seventeen Moments of Spring”, “Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson” and many others. It was during the Brezhnev years that Andrei Tarkovsky filmed Andrei Rublev, Solaris, Stalker, and the absolute masterpiece of all time, The Mirror. There is a version that censorship even in some way encouraged artists to look for new forms and metaphors. Interestingly, many films of that time are generally devoid of an ideological component, for example, The Irony of Fate by Eldar Ryazanov looks like a story that could happen in any country. And after all, somehow they were missed on the screens of cinemas. Although, of course, many films went on the shelf, this cannot be denied.

At the same time, outstanding theater directors worked: Yuri Lyubimov, Anatoly Efros, Oleg Efremov, Georgy Tovstonogov. Yes, they had problems, and not everyone was allowed to stage, but they still worked and created legendary performances. And Brezhnev personally did not allow the famous Taganka Theater to be shut down, that's a fact.

Also during this period, a great interest arose in society in various spiritual teachings and philosophical knowledge. And it doesn't seem to be banned. This was especially carried away among scientists and the intelligentsia.

“I myself, as a graduate student, participated in the work of the Novosibirsk group Integral,” recalls Nikolai Vasiliev, Philosopher, Candidate of Sciences, Head of the Department of Humanitarian Disciplines at the Russian Law Academy of the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation. - No one forbade us to hold Roerich readings. I listened to the speech of Svyatoslav Roerich twice. I saw Lev Gumilyov when he returned from exile. Imagine! His ideas were disseminated through various articles and collections. I personally belonged to the association of Zen Buddhists, and we mastered this culture from a cognitive standpoint. And all this happened quite officially at seminars in the House of Scientists. The Brezhnev period is a great creative time: science, space, art.”

And television! It was customary to kick him, they say, one lie and propaganda. But remember that under the “totalitarian” Brezhnev regime, in addition to the programs “Serving the Soviet Union” and “Lenin University of Millions”, the legendary and even avant-garde KVN, What? Where? When?”, “You Can Do It” and “Funny Guys”. And interestingly, the heroes of these programs looked absolutely normal, modern young people, not crushed by propaganda. That is, the communist ideology was on its own, and people lived and developed on their own. Especially the youth. It differed little from the youth in Europe. I listened to the same music (although I had to get it out), dressed the same way, went to discos the same way.

Coupons, shortages, queues

Until the end of the seventies big problems there were no products. I was a child, but I remember huge heads of cheese and hams hanging on hooks in our deli. Then there were queues for sausage, and quite wild ones, you had to stand in them for hours without hope, because the sausage could suddenly end in front of you.

Gradually, standing in lines in the USSR became the meaning of life. Seeing the line, people automatically got into it, not even knowing what they were selling.

In 1980 (and according to some reports, in 1979), coupons for meat and food were introduced in Irkutsk. butter. Two coupons per person per month. On the ticket you could take 800 g of sausage, or a pack of dumplings, or a soup set, or a chicken, or 10 cutlets. Coupons were issued in the house management strictly according to the passport for all family members, including newborns. Moreover, the presence of a coupon was not a guarantee of the purchase of the desired product.

“It was good luck to take two packs of dumplings for one ticket, which were stretched for several days,” recalls the sociologist, dean of the social faculty of the Institute of Social Sciences of ISU, Ph.D. philosophical sciences Evgenia Goltsova. - Coupons were not merchandised in all stores, so there were always queues, crush and even tragedy. In a grocery store on Zhukovsky Street, the buttons from my coat were somehow torn off in a stampede.

Interestingly, people did not particularly grumble and even welcomed the introduction of the coupon system. They said: let 800 grams of sausage, but everyone will have enough. Later, after Brezhnev's death, coupons for vodka, sugar, toilet and laundry soap, and vegetable oil appeared.

double morality

And today, after more than 30 years, many Russians began to feel nostalgic for Brezhnev times. On the Web, you can find dozens of forums where people write that there was no better time in their life. Why?

“Firstly, people tend to forget everything,” Evgenia Goltsova explains, “especially the bad. The social memory of our population is short. People have forgotten Stalin's sins and in the same way they have forgotten all the bad things that happened under Brezhnev. I remember how in the spring of 1979 we, students, were gathered in the gym of the technical school and held a rally in support of the decision of the party and government to send troops to Afghanistan. Around the same time, a graduate of our technical school, the brother of my classmate, joined the army. And a few months later he returned ... in a zinc coffin.

Secondly, many of those who today say that everything was fine under Brezhnev were then much younger. And in youth, as they say, "the girls were more beautiful, and the sausage was tastier." For many, longing for the Brezhnev years is a longing for bygone youth.

Thirdly, we must not forget that everything is known in comparison. There is interesting data from VTsIOM at the beginning of the 2000s on the attitude of the population towards the Brezhnev era, in which people rated it with a plus sign. Why? Because those who had just survived the "dashing" 90s answered. Under Brezhnev, they already had something: a job, an apartment, a dacha, a sense of stability, but in the 90s they had to survive. People were losing their savings, jobs, loved ones... Therefore, many began to remember the old days with nostalgia.

However, not everyone is nostalgic for Brezhnev's stability. Because it was then that such phenomena as deficit, blat appeared. According to the sociologist, in the 1980s, the needs and interests of the population grew, and the possibilities of satisfying them lagged behind. The so-called double morality appeared, which was reflected in art. Many films were shot in which this was condemned: “Award”, “I ask for words”, “Alien letters”, “Joke”, etc. As a result of adapting to such a life, people developed a kind of immunity, which was otherwise called indifference, that is don't take anything seriously. And of course, the alcoholization of society. People drank from hopelessness, from lies, from constant breaks in the pattern.

Thus, ideology came into conflict with real life. Many experts believe that in the 1970s, Soviet society had already moved away from the Leninist ideology, in fact it had become bourgeois. The main values ​​of that period are an apartment, six acres, a Romanian wall, a Czech chandelier. And, of course, people are already tired of the slogans "The plans of the party are the plans of the people."

Historian, professor at ISU Viktor Dyatlov believes that it is necessary to separate the personality of Brezhnev himself and his era.

“The era of stagnation is a very inadequate definition,” says the professor. - In fact, this is an era of huge internal transformations associated with the ideological demobilization of society, and in many respects the authorities. For socialism, as an ideocratic system, this is death. Unanimity, the dissolution of a person in the state, unity, mobilization - these are the most important conditions for existence.

Under Brezhnev, society began to lose faith in a bright future, in the justice and justification of the existing system of relations. Socialism offered to live in conditions of constant mobilization and ideological excitement, constant struggle. And people are just tired. They wanted simple human joys.

“I would define stagnation as a process of privatization of a person. People in the mass did not rebel, they did not become ideological opponents of socialism. They just started living for themselves. And it was this life that pronounced a death sentence on the system for itself. Yes, and the government itself was disappointed in the mobilization, under Brezhnev there were no more mass repressions. And the regime began to rot alive. Cynicism and doublethink became the norm. Publicly they said one thing, in the kitchen - another, they thought the third. Socialism gradually turned into a ritual, into an empty shell in which no one believed. And he collapsed himself, fell apart, as they say, out of the blue. No war, no cataclysms, no internal opposition. Not one of the 18 million members of the CPSU came to his defense in 1991.”

In conclusion, it begs to throw a bridge from the era of stagnation to our time. Today in Russia we have almost everything that was under Brezhnev: stability, pride in the state, and even the stores have everything. Only for some reason new Tarkovskys and Lyubimovs do not appear.

• The independent think tank Yuri Levada recently asked Russians which of the last century's leaders they value most and remember best. And the citizens chose Brezhnev, who - at first with a firm, and then with an increasingly weak hand - ruled the empire from 1964 to 1982. And although liberals are tearing their hair out, there is nothing to be surprised here. ( An excerpt from an article by Vatslav Radzivinovich "Dear Leonid Ilyich").

The economy of the USSR during the period of "stagnation"

Twenty years, from the mid-1960s to the mid-1980s, when the political leadership of the country was headed by L.I. Brezhnev (1964–1982), Yu.V. Andropov (1982–1984) and K.U. Chernenko (1984-1985) is called the time of "stagnation". Started with decisive economic reforms, it ended with an increase in negative trends in all spheres of public life, economic stagnation, and a social crisis. political system. You can cite a lot of data indicating the growth of production - in the 1970s. The USSR caught up with the most developed countries of the West in terms of industrial output. By the beginning of the 1980s. overtook and overtook even the USA, Germany, Japan, England, France in per capita production of steel, coal, electricity, cement. It was possible to achieve parity in the field of armaments, the successes of the Soviet Union in space exploration were impressive. However, military spending accounted for 40% of the state budget, military-industrial complex products - 20% of the gross social product. Of the 25 billion rubles. total spending on science - about 20 billion rubles. went to military-technical research and development. This imbalance in the economic development of the country increasingly affected the standard of living of people, it was impossible to overcome it within the framework of the old command-administrative system.

About L.I. Brezhnev was told that, having quite average abilities and having a career as a typical party apparatchik, he nevertheless, having come to power, really sought to carry out useful reforms in the country. The beginning of his reign testifies in favor of this.

From the March Plenum of the Central Committee of the CPSU (1964), attempts began to revive agriculture: the size of subsidiary farms in the countryside was restored and even increased; the tax on the maintenance of personal livestock was abolished, it was allowed to sell feed to private individuals; the plan for state purchases of grain in the collective farms was reduced, over the next 10 years it was decided not to increase it, and the excess grain remained at the disposal of the collective farms; state prices for the main types of agricultural products increased, the debts of collective farms to the state were written off.

All these measures were an attempt to apply economic regulatory measures to the agricultural sector. But only to the agricultural sector as a whole, and not to the very essence production process. The main negative feature of the Soviet Agriculture- lack of economic interest of the employee in the results of his work(since 1966, a guaranteed wage for collective farmers was introduced, which was not related to productivity). Concessions in relation to subsidiary farms also did not lead to anything - over the years of experiments with the village, people who were ready for hard work for personal benefit irrevocably disappeared. The peasants finally turned into collective farmers and state farmers.

In September 1965, a period of economic reforms began under the leadership of A.N. Kosygin. First of all, the sectoral system of production management (ministries) was restored, replacing the territorial method of managing the economy (sovnarkhozes), introduced during the reign of N.S. Khrushchev. The economic reform implied the introduction of cost accounting and the granting of limited autonomy to enterprises. But "grassroots planning" was still combined with planning from the center, although the number of mandatory planning indicators was reduced to 9 (instead of the previous 30). The main indicator of the work of industries was the volume of products sold. In addition, the introduction of economic levers was supposed to revive the economy. The profit received by the enterprise remained in its funds, from which, in turn, material incentives for workers were to be conducted (bonuses, “13th salary” at the end of the year). In order to improve the discipline of mutual deliveries, Kosygin agreed to adopt a resolution according to which the fulfillment of the plan was counted only after the satisfaction of all consumer orders. This was opposed by the State Planning Commission and the ministers, who argued that in this case all their enterprises would be left not only without bonuses, but also without salaries. The independence of enterprises led to the fact that they deliberately underestimated their planned targets, thus, wages grew faster than labor productivity. The heads of enterprises and industries were not interested in the introduction of scientific and technological achievements, since the introduction of innovations knocked down the planned production cycle. Economic incentives for workers also gradually lost their role. "13 salary" and bonuses began to be issued to everyone so as not to violate the main ideological postulate Soviet society- "social justice".

Originally conceived by A.N. Kosygin's measures gave certain results. The indicators achieved by agriculture in 1966-1969 were much higher than in the previous period. Labor productivity grew on average per annum during this period by 6.5 percent, which was twice as much as in 1961-1965. Wage fund for work for 1965–1975. increased by 1.5 times. However, in the confrontation between economic principles and directive planning won the latter. The Soviet nomenklatura could not fail to understand that economic stimulus economy will eventually make the huge bureaucracy itself unnecessary. Since 1970, the reforms of A.N. Kosygin were curtailed.

In the Soviet industry in 1960 - the first half of the 1980s. the disproportion in the development of economic sectors grew sharply. The ongoing "arms race" led to the fact that military spending absorbed 20% of GNP. Huge costs required maintaining leadership in space exploration. In general, age characteristics continued to deteriorate in the industry production equipment. As a result, labor productivity growth rates and some other performance indicators have seriously decreased. If we compare the average annual growth of the most important national economic indicators, we can see that it decreased from five years to five years. Nevertheless, the severity of the impending crisis in the 1970s. was smoothed by the large sums of petrodollars received. The conflict between the Arab countries and Israel that broke out in 1973 led to a sharp rise in oil prices. The export of Soviet oil began to bring huge income in currency. It was used to buy consumer goods, food, which created the illusion of relative well-being. The country's leadership accelerated the development of oil and gas fields in new areas of Siberia and the North. The raw material orientation of the country's economy increased.

In 1974, the construction of the Baikal-Amur Mainline (BAM) began. Enormous funds were spent on the purchase of entire enterprises, complex equipment and technologies.

In the 1970s - early 1980s. industrial giants and agro-industrial associations (APOs) were built. However, the low efficiency of economic activity did not allow rational use of unexpected opportunities. In the first half of the 1980s. the economy, by inertia, continued to develop largely on an extensive basis, focused on the involvement in production of additional labor and material resources. The pace of introduction of mechanization and automation did not meet the requirements of the time. Manual labor by the mid-80s. about 50 million people were employed: about a third of the workers in industry, more than half in construction, and three-quarters in agriculture.

The economic situation in the country continued to worsen. The inefficient economy proved unable to solve the problems of raising the standard of living of the working people. In fact, the task was failed - to significantly strengthen the social orientation of the economy, increasing the pace of development of industries National economy producing consumer goods. The residual principle of resource allocation - first production, and only then man - dominated socio-economic policy. The unresolved food problem also had a negative impact on the social development of society.

A striking manifestation of the economic crisis of the period of "stagnation" was the existence of the so-called "shadow economy". In conditions when state production could not provide citizens with a sufficient amount of consumer goods, services, and sometimes food, economic ties appeared outside state control. Enterprises produced unrecorded products and sold them, bypassing state trade. A whole stratum of entrepreneurs ("guild workers"), which officially did not exist in the USSR, was formed, whose income by the beginning of the 1980s. reached 80 billion rubles. In the shadow economy, there was an intensive fusion of the state apparatus with the criminal world.

In November 1982 L.I. died. Brezhnev and General Secretary The Central Committee of the CPSU was elected chairman of the KGB Yu.V. Andropov. In July 1983, at the initiative of Yu.V. Andropov, the government Decree "On intensifying work to strengthen socialist labor discipline" was adopted. However, an attempt to bring order to production with the help of strict administrative control was not successful. In August 1983, the Central Committee of the CPSU and the Council of Ministers of the USSR adopted a resolution "On measures to accelerate scientific and technological progress in the national economy." But all these directives could not save the dying command economy. By the mid 1980s. she has completely exhausted her resources.

Crisis of ideology

The "stick" and "carrot" of the totalitarian political regime, which developed in the USSR, were propaganda that appealed to the labor enthusiasm of the working people, and a terrible system of terror that fell, first of all, on those who did not succumb to Soviet agitation and propaganda. During the “thaw” period (1953-1964), when the government stopped repressions, abolished the Gulag and rehabilitated hundreds of thousands of political prisoners, only one means of influencing the masses remained at its disposal - ideology. At first, propaganda appeals continued to operate by inertia, not even backed by fear of terror.

But over time, more and more people began to think about how the proclaimed diverges from the real. And the ideology itself was increasingly moving away from real life of people. If in reality the life of the people improved slowly (and in some periods worsened), then in party appeals and slogans, the progress of Soviet society went by leaps and bounds. In practice, people observed economic crises, technical backwardness, social inequality between the nomenklatura ( leaders approved by the party bodies) and the general public, political unfreedom. All these phenomena were hushed up in the party programs. N.S. Khrushchev declared in 1961 that "the present generation of Soviet people will live under communism" and planned to "build communism by 1980". The fact of the achievement by the Soviet Union of a "developed socialist society" and the transition to the construction of communism was declared by the Constitution of the USSR, adopted on October 7, 1977. The crack between the people and the authorities became an abyss. One of the main crises of Soviet society was the crisis of confidence.

In October 1964 N.S. Khrushchev was removed from power by a decree of the Presidium of the Central Committee of the CPSU. Stability has become the main symbol of the new political leadership. The era of L.I. Brezhnev (1964–1982) and Yu.V. Andropov (1982–1984) and K.U. Chernenko (1984-1985), called by historians the era of "stagnation". In socio-political terms, it is characterized by the strengthening of ideological control over the life of society, the decisive suppression of the democratic movement that originated in society during the years of Khrushchev's reforms, and the strengthening of the leading role of the party in society was given exceptional importance. Such attitudes in the sphere of domestic policy focused on strengthening the methods of administration in the management of society, and strengthened the authoritarian-bureaucratic tendencies in relations between leaders and subordinates. At the same time, in the political documents adopted in the 1960s–1970s, the democratization of the Soviet state was declared one of the major areas party politics.

A striking example of the political hypocrisy of the era of stagnation was the "Brezhnev" Constitution adopted by the Supreme Soviet of the USSR (October 7, 1977). The new Basic Law emphasized its continuity with the constitutions of 1924 and 1936. Its first section proclaimed the building of "developed socialism" in the USSR.

In the 6th article of the Constitution of the CPSU, it was declared "the leading and guiding force of Soviet society". Thus, the party acted as the core of the political system of society. The Constitution reflected the reality. Being in exceptional conditions of political monopoly, the CPSU finally transformed into a supranational structure. This contributed to a sharp increase in the power of the party apparatus. The principle of “party unity” led to the fact that any criticism was suppressed, inner-party democracy was curtailed, bureaucracy, demagoguery, abuse of office, bribery, etc. flourished.

On the other hand, the 1977 Constitution included an impressive list of socio-economic and political rights of citizens of the USSR. In particular, for the first time, the rights to health protection, housing, the use of cultural achievements, and freedom of creativity were enshrined in law. New forms of "direct democracy" were also declared: a popular discussion and a referendum. One of the main tasks of the Basic Law was the protection of individual rights and freedoms, such as the right to appeal against the actions of officials, criticize the activities of state and public organizations, protect the honor and dignity of a citizen in court, etc. The Constitution also secured the broad rights of the union republics, in particular, the possibility of secession from the USSR.

If the constitution actually did not deviate from the truth regarding the role of the CPSU in the life of Soviet society, then the declared expansion of “democracy and democracy” did not exist, the state was unable to provide most of the socio-economic rights, and the declared civil liberties were never respected.

The reaction of society to the official falsehood was most acute in the dissident movement, which began to emerge at the end of the Khrushchev era, and reached its peak during the years of "stagnation". Among the dissidents (dissenters) in the USSR were Academician A.D. Sakharov, Corresponding Member of the Academy of Sciences I.R. Shafarevich; writers A.I. Solzhenitsyn, A.D. Sinyavsky, Yu.M. Daniel, S.D. Dovlatov, V.P. Aksenov, A.G. Bitov, A.T. Marchenko; poets I.A. Brodsky, A.A. Galich, B.Sh. Okudzhava, V.S. Vysotsky, N.M. Korzhavin, E.B. Rein, public figures V.I. Novodvorskaya, E.G. Bonner, S.A. Kovalev and many others.

For many of them, the rejection of the totalitarian regime resulted in an active struggle - the so-called "human rights movement". They actively demanded from the state the observance of all the rights and freedoms of the individual, fixed in the Constitution, the abolition of the caesura, and the cessation of Stalin's "creeping rehabilitation" outlined in the official ideology. The first open action of human rights activists took place in 1965, when they staged a demonstration on Pushkin Square in Moscow demanding that trial over A.D. Sinyavsky and Yu.M. Daniel, who were arrested for publishing their works in the West, was carried out in the open. In 1968, human rights activists reacted by protesting against the suppression Soviet troops attempts at liberalization in Czechoslovakia. Despite the fact that the authorities responded with brutal repressions - arrests, exiles, forced detention of dissidents in psychiatric hospitals, the human rights movement did not subside. From 1968 to 1983 The underground information bulletin "Chronicle of Current Events" was published, which recorded cases of human rights violations in the USSR. In 1970, Soviet human rights activists became part of a worldwide movement. The state tightened repressions, the influence of the KGB in the political system increased, but, on the other hand, the international fame of many leaders of human rights activists forced the government to make some concessions. Some active dissidents were allowed to leave the USSR. In relation to others, expulsion from the country was forcibly applied (the expulsion of A.I. Solzhenitsyn, 1974).

Another form of manifestation of dissent was unofficial literature, the so-called "samizdat". In the underground almanacs "Veche", "Search" and many others, authors were published whose works were not accepted by Soviet censorship, and who had the courage to defend their point of view. Works banned by the authorities were secretly sent to the West and published there (“tamizdat”). On "samizdat" films, the sincere songs of B.Sh. Okudzhava, V.S. Vysotsky, A.A. Galich and other forbidden bards.

"Detente" of international tension

The history of any country, as a rule, is divided by scientists into certain periods of development. For example, speaking of Russia in the 17th-18th centuries, they often single out the Petrine era, Palace coups, Catherine's reforms. In turn, the 20th century is divided into the period of Stalinism, thaw, stagnation, perestroika. Each of us has a different attitude towards them. For example, some characterize the period of stagnation in the USSR extremely negatively, while others consider it perhaps the best Soviet era. Let's try to understand this in more detail.

Concept definition

What do historians mean when they speak of a period of stagnation? Mainly an era in the development of the country, which was distinguished by a relatively high standard of living for Soviet citizens, stability in all spheres of public life, and the absence of serious political and social upheavals.

The term "stagnation" came into use after Mikhail Gorbachev's speech at the 27th Congress of the Communist Party. The General Secretary used it to explain the slowdown in the country's economic progress. On the contrary, according to him, stagnation began to clearly appear in Soviet society.

The era of well-being

Like any historical period, the time frame of stagnation is rather arbitrary. Most often, it refers to the time when the country was led by Leonid Brezhnev. However, it is also wrong to think that immediately after his death perestroika began in the USSR. Approximately, historians define the years of the period of stagnation as follows: from 1964 to 1986. Thus, it covers the reign of Brezhnev L., Andropov Y. and Chernenko K.

The word “stagnation” causes negative associations for most of us. Nevertheless, many researchers do not identify this era with the complete absence of the country's forward movement. Moreover, they point out that over the twenty years of stagnation, the Soviet Union has actually reached its peak in various spheres of state life, which it will not be superfluous to learn about.

"Golden Age" of the USSR

This is how they sometimes characterize the years when the country was led by Leonid Brezhnev. The period of stagnation, and few people remember it, began with the introduction of cost accounting - a system of economic relations that is inherent in the capitalist economy. Even under the conditions of a planned socialist economy, the results of the 8th Five-Year Plan were impressive.

However, economic achievements were not the only ones. The Soviet Union has achieved great success in space exploration, in sports, and in the sphere of culture. The standard of living of the Soviet people has risen, their social security has increased, and confidence in the future has also strengthened.

Industry

However, as many scientists note, the stability in the economy of those years was associated, on the one hand, with a sharp increase in world oil prices, and on the other hand, with the discovery of black gold deposits in Siberia. Thus, the country's leadership could postpone further reforms without losing profits. Although economic growth slowed down during the period of stagnation, oil revenues smoothed out the consequences of this negative process for the time being.

During these years, many large enterprises were built in the USSR, including car factory in Tolyatti. In 1974, thousands of Komsomol members went to the taiga to build a railway line - BAM, which, according to the plan of the Soviet leadership, was to play a key role in the development Far East. The construction turned out to be another long-term construction, and it has not yet paid off.

Agricultural sector

In the 1970s, the situation in agriculture worsened. After the agrarian reform, many collective farmers began to move to the cities, and students who did not have the necessary skills came en masse to harvest the crops. The agrarian sector of the Soviet economy gradually fell into decline, and by the mid-80s the threat of a food crisis was imminent in the country. Shortage of goods and long queues at stores have become commonplace Everyday life during the period of stagnation.

social paradox

And yet, in comparison with previous periods in the history of the Soviet Union, the years of stagnation were more favorable. Goods and food were relatively cheap, most citizens had the opportunity to go to the sea in the summer or have free rest in trade union boarding houses and sanatoriums. In 1967, the country switched to a five-day working week, many have become available to purchase household appliances and cars.

At the same time, of course, we are not talking about comparing the well-being of Soviet citizens with the standard of living in Western countries. In this respect, the USSR was definitely losing.

Foreign policy

During the period of stagnation, the country's leadership pursued a twofold policy. On the one hand, important treaties aimed at relieving international tension were signed. On the other hand, the USSR sent troops to Czechoslovakia (1968) and Afghanistan (1979). These demonstrations of military power have caused great damage to the country's image on the world stage.

In the early 1970s, the Soviet Union caught up with the United States in terms of nuclear potential. The build-up of military power had disastrous consequences for the country's economy. Enormous funds from the state budget were directed not to the development of industry and agriculture, but to the needs of army designers. Such militarization undermined the already degrading economy of the country.

Fight against dissent

Although the atmosphere of total fear disappeared under Leonid Brezhnev, this in no way means that during the years when he was at the helm of power, one could freely express discontent in the Soviet Union. On the contrary, the KGB, especially after the events in Czechoslovakia, stepped up the fight against dissidents. True, the main method of intimidation was no longer camps, but psychiatric hospitals. There was no question of freedom of speech, the party completely controlled art, making it the mouthpiece of official propaganda.

Results

Despite some positive moments, by and large, the period of stagnation became a prelude to perestroika. The need for change in the mid-1980s was realized not only by dissidents, but also by the party leadership. The main reasons that prompted Gorbachev M. to make a report on economic stagnation were:

• inefficiency of command methods of managing the national economy;
• collapse of the financial system;
• the backlog of the USSR in the field of technology;
• commodity and food shortages;
• falling living standards;
• decline in world oil prices;
• lack of economic reforms.

However, for many Soviet citizens, the years of Leonid Brezhnev's rule have become synonymous with stability and prosperity.

Critics of the cult of personality and the Caribbean crisis, which almost plunged the world into the third world war, came Brezhnev Leonid Ilyich, whose years of rule were remembered for a naturally reverse process.

Stagnation, increased importance of Stalin in the eyes of the public, softening in relations with the West, but at the same time attempts to influence world politics- this era was remembered with such characteristics. The years of Brezhnev's rule in the USSR were among the key years that contributed to the subsequent economic and political crisis of the nineties. What was this politician like?

First steps to power

Leonid Ilyich was born into an ordinary family of workers in 1906. He studied first at the land management technical school, and then studied to be a metallurgist. As the director of the Technical School of Metallurgy, which is located in Dneprodzerzhinsk, he became a member of the CPSU party in 1931. When the Great Patriotic War broke out, southern front Brezhnev worked as deputy head of the political department. By the end of the war, Leonid Ilyich became a major general. Already in 1950, he worked as the first secretary in Moldova, and in subsequent years he replaced the head in the Political Directorate of the Army of the Soviet Union. Then he becomes chairman of the Presidium of the Supreme Council. It is known that between Khrushchev and Brezhnev there were absolutely trusting relationship, which allowed the second to move to the levers of government after the illness of Nikita Sergeevich.

Brezhnev's reforms

The years of Leonid Brezhnev's rule (1964-1982) can be characterized as a time of conservative measures. Agricultural recovery was not the main task for the ruler. Although Kosygin's reform was carried out during this period, its results were a failure. Spending on housing and health care has only declined, while spending on the military complex has grown by leaps and bounds. Brezhnev Leonid Ilyich, whose years of rule were remembered for the growth of the bureaucratic apparatus and bureaucratic arbitrariness, was more focused on foreign policy, apparently not finding ways to resolve internal stagnation in society.

Foreign policy

It was precisely over the political influence of the Soviet Union in the world that Brezhnev worked most of all, whose years of rule were full of foreign policy events. On the one hand, Leonid Ilyich makes important steps in the de-escalation of the conflict between the USSR and the USA. Countries finally find a dialogue and agree on cooperation. In 1972, the President of America visits Moscow for the first time, where an agreement on the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons is signed, and in 1980 the capital hosts guests from all countries for the Olympic Games.

However, Brezhnev, whose years of rule are known for his active participation in various military conflicts, was not an absolute peacemaker. For Leonid Ilyich, it was important to designate the place of the USSR among world powers capable of influencing the resolution of foreign policy issues. Thus, the Soviet Union sends troops to Afghanistan, participates in conflicts in Vietnam and the Middle East. In addition, the attitude of the socialist countries that were friendly to the USSR until that time was changing, in the internal affairs of which Brezhnev also interfered. The years of the reign of Leonid Ilyich were remembered for the suppression of Czechoslovak uprisings, the deterioration of relations with Poland and the conflict with China on Damansky Island.

Awards

Leonid Ilyich Brezhnev was especially distinguished by his love for awards and titles. Sometimes it reached such an absurdity that as a result of this a lot of anecdotes and fictions appeared. However, it is difficult to argue with the facts.

Leonid Ilyich received his first award back in Stalin's time. After the war, he was awarded the Order of Lenin. One can only imagine how proud Brezhnev was of this title. The years of Khrushchev's rule brought him several more awards: the second Order of Lenin and the Order of the Great Patriotic War of the first degree. All this was not enough for the conceited Leonid Ilyich.

Already during his reign, Brezhnev was awarded the title of Hero of the Soviet Union four times out of a possible three. He also received the title of Marshal of the USSR and the Order of Victory, which was awarded only to great commanders who participated in active hostilities, where Brezhnev never got.

Board results

The main defining word of the era of Brezhnev's rule was "stagnation". During the leadership of Leonid Ilyich, the economy finally showed its weakness and lack of growth. Attempts to carry out reforms have not led to the expected results.

As a conservative, Brezhnev was not satisfied with the policy of softening ideological pressure, therefore, in his time, control over culture only increased. One of clear examples this is the expulsion of AI Solzhenitsyn from the USSR in 1974.

Although relative improvements were planned in foreign policy, the aggressive position of the USSR and the attempt to influence the internal conflicts of other countries worsened the attitude of the world community towards the Soviet Union.

In general, Brezhnev left behind a number of difficult economic and political issues that his successors had to solve.

Domestic and foreign policy of the USSR in 1965-1984.

This period has gone down in history as the "Age of Stagnation". The term "stagnation" was first coined in political report M.S. Gorbachev at the 27th Congress of the Central Committee of the CPSU, when he noted in his speech that some stagnation began to appear in the development of the Soviet Union and the life of citizens. Since then, the term has become widely used by politicians, economists and historians.

“Stagnation” refers to both positive and negative phenomena.. On the one hand, it was during these twenty years, according to historians, that the USSR reached its highest development - a huge number of large and small cities were built, the military industry was actively developing, the Soviet Union began to explore space and became a leader in this area; the country has also achieved significant success in sports, cultural sphere and a variety of sectors, including the social sphere - the level of well-being of citizens has increased significantly. Stability is the main term that describes that period.

However, the concept of "stagnation" has another meaning. The country's economy during this period actually stopped its development. There was a so-called "oil boom", which allowed the country's leadership to profit from the sale of oil. At the same time, the economy itself was not developing and required reforms, however, due to general prosperity, this was paid less attention than required. Because of this, many call the period of stagnation - "the calm before the storm."

The second half of the 60s - the middle of the 80s were a period of increasing negative phenomena in all spheres of society. They showed up:

in the stagnation of the economy,

Growth of opposition sentiments of the population,

The measures taken by the country's leadership to "improve" socialism could not stop the impending crisis of the administrative-command system.

Characteristics of the era of stagnation

1. Conservation of the political regime.

· During Brezhnev's tenure in power, the administrative apparatus has changed little. Tired of constant reshuffles and reorganizations, party members happily accepted Brezhnev's main slogan - "ensure stability" - which led not only to the absence of serious changes in the structure of the ruling apparatus, but actually froze it.

· For the entire period there were no reshuffles in the party, and all positions actually became for life. As a result, average age structure members government controlled was 60-70 years old. This situation also led to the strengthening of party control - the party now controlled the activities of many, even extremely small, state institutions.

2. Increasing role of the military sphere.

The country was in a state cold war with the United States, so one of the main tasks was to increase its military power. During this period they began to produce large quantities weapons, including nuclear and missile, active development of new combat systems was carried out.

· Industry, as in the period of the Great Patriotic War, largely worked for the military sphere. The role of the KGB increased again not only in domestic but also in foreign policy.

3. The decline of the agricultural industry and the cessation of economic development.

· Despite the fact that, in general, the country was successfully moving forward, prosperity was growing, the economy plunged into "stagnation" and sharply reduced the pace of its development. The main funds of the USSR received from the sale of oil, most of enterprises gradually moved to big cities and agriculture slowly decayed.

· After the agrarian reform, many peasants actually lost their jobs, as the famous “potato trips” among students were introduced. Kolkhozes and sovkhozes more and more often brought only a loss, since the work was done by students, not professionals, crop losses increased in some areas up to 30%.

Change of political course. With the resignation of N. S. Khrushchev, the process ended.

liberalization of public political life, the transformations begun by him ended. A new leadership has come to power. L. I. Berezhnev became the first secretary of the Central Committee of the CPSU (since 1966 - General Secretary) who had been in the party for many years. It was he who was one of the initiators and organizers of the removal of N. S. Khrushchev. A cautious, conservative person, he most of all strove for the stability of society. A. N. Kosygin was appointed head of the government, who in different years led the State Planning Committee of the USSR, the ministries of finance, light and textile industries.

Some of the new leaders, including A. N. Kosygin and Secretary of the Party Central Committee Yu. V. Andropov, considered it necessary to further develop the country, based on the decisions of the XX Party Congress. They considered it necessary to continue the reformist course in the economy and further liberalization of social and political life in order to strengthen the existing system. At the same time, they opposed radical changes in society. A more conservative path of development was advocated by L. I. Brezhnev, M. A. Suslov, A. K. Shelepin and some other workers of the party and state apparatus. They associated the achievement of social stability with a revision of the political course of recent years, with the rejection of the policy of de-Stalinization and reforms.

Conflict of opinions on the choice of paths further development society ended with a turn from the reformism of the Khrushchev “thaw” period to a moderately conservative course in politics and ideology. The ideological and theoretical basis of the activities of the new leadership was the concept of "developed socialism" developed in the late 60s. In official documents, "developed socialism" was interpreted as an obligatory stage on the path of advancement of Soviet society to communism, during which it was necessary to achieve an organic connection of all spheres of public life. The concept did not question the theoretical propositions about the communist perspective contained in the party documents of previous years, in particular in the Program of the CPSU. At the same time, this concept focused on the need to solve the current problems of one of the stages of building communism - the stage of "developed socialism". Shortcomings and crisis phenomena that existed in society were considered as the result of contradictions inevitable in the process of its development. The policy of “improving” socialism was supposed to contribute to the elimination of shortcomings. Active promoters of the concept of "developed socialism" were L. I. Brezhnev, who replaced him as head of the CPSU, Yu. V. Andropov, and the latter's successor, K. U. Chernenko.

Two development trends. Complex and contradictory processes took place in the socio-political life of the 1960s and 1970s. Under the guise of fighting the voluntarism of N. S. Khrushchev, the transformations he had begun were curtailed. At the end of 1964, industrial and rural party organizations were united. Later, the territorial system of managing the national economy was abolished. The distortions made in the agrarian sphere, in particular in relation to personal household plots, were eliminated. Departure from the course of de-Stalinization began. The press stopped criticizing the personality cult of JV Stalin and exposing the lawlessness of the Stalinist regime. Censorship was tightened again. As before, access to sources of scientific information - domestic and foreign - for researchers was limited. This measure had serious consequences for the development of science. Neither during this period, nor later, was complete actual equality of the republics achieved.. Moreover, new problems arose in interethnic relations that required immediate resolution. Representatives of the republics demanded the expansion of the network of schools with teaching in mother tongue. Strengthened defense movement environment, for the preservation of historical monuments and national traditions. But the country's leadership did not pay due attention to the growing conflicts in national sphere. The growth of the national self-consciousness of peoples, speeches in defense of national interests were seen as a manifestation of local nationalism. In the development of social and political life, two trends were more and more clearly traced: democratic and anti-democratic. They manifested themselves, in particular, in the sphere of management of industrial and state affairs. At the turn of the 1960s and 1970s, the powers of local Soviets were significantly expanded. They coordinated and controlled the activities of enterprises, institutions, collective farms in the field of housing construction, public education, and health care. Deputies of local and Supreme Soviets received the right to make proposals for hearing at the sessions of the reports of any authorities or officials controlled by the Soviets. In the 1970s and early 1980s, the number of public associations in enterprises and institutions. Organizations of people's control and technical creativity, permanent production conferences (PDPS) were created. Widespread voluntary people's squads for the protection of public order. The activities of mass associations, which were led by party organizations, created the illusion of participation in the management of social production of the general population. The activities of state and public organizations were managed by the Communist Party.

In 1977, a new Constitution of the USSR was adopted, which legally consolidated the construction of "developed socialism". The Constitution expanded the social rights of citizens: the right to work, free education, medical care, recreation, etc. The Constitution of the USSR for the first time officially fixed the special role of the CPSU in society.

Main principle state power sovereignty of the people was proclaimed. The political basis of the state, the Soviets, approved by the previous Constitutions, was consolidated. Henceforth they became known as the Councils of People's Deputies. All Soviets of People's Deputies - the Supreme Soviet of the USSR, the Supreme Soviets of the Union and Autonomous Republics, the Territorial, Regional and other Soviets constituted a single system of state authorities (Scheme 1).

At the head of the system was the bicameral Supreme Soviet of the USSR, consisting of the Soviet of the Union and the Soviet of Nationalities. His duties were: the adoption and amendment of the all-Union Constitution, the inclusion of new republics in the Union, the approval of state budgets, plans for social and economic development. In between sessions of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR, its functions were performed by the Presidium. Everyday management activities were carried out with the help of the state administration system, which was headed by the Council of Ministers of the USSR (Scheme 2). The Communist Party was called the core of the political system of a society of developed socialism. Article six of the Basic Law assigned to the CPSU the role of the leading and guiding force of society which determines the general perspective of its development, the line of domestic and foreign policy. Basis confirmed economic system - socialist ownership of the means of production in its two forms: state and cooperative. Separate sections of the Constitution were devoted to issues social development and foreign policy. The principles of relations between the USSR and other powers of the world were formulated: sovereign equality, mutual renunciation of the use of force, respect for the territorial integrity of states, peaceful settlement of disputes.

Since the end of 1964, the country's leadership has been trying to carry out economic reforms.. The March plenum of the Central Committee of the CPSU (1965) outlined measures for agriculture:

establish a firm purchase plan for 6 years (1965-1970) to increase purchase prices,

Introduce a 50% surcharge for above-plan products,

increase investment in the village,

cut taxes.

The implementation of these measures led to a temporary acceleration of agricultural production.

The essence of the economic reform in industry (September 1965) was as follows. m:

transition to sectoral management,

transfer of enterprises to self-financing,

reduction in the number of planned indicators (instead of 30-9),

· Creation of incentive funds at the enterprises.

A.N. played an active role in the preparation and implementation of the reform. Kosygin(Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the USSR).

The economic reform of 1965 proved to be successful during the years of the 8th Five-Year Plan(1966 - 1970):

· The volume of industrial production increased by 50%.

was built 1900 large enterprises(The Volga Automobile Plant in Togliatti produced the first Zhiguli in 1970).

· Agricultural production increased by 20%.

By the early 1970s, the reform had ceased to operate.. Market mechanisms for managing production were paralyzed by the command and control system. Agriculture again moved to the 2nd plan. Economic reform, not supported by the reform of the political system, was doomed.

From the beginning of the 70s. the rate of decline in production has increased:

· The economy continued to develop on an extensive basis, (involvement in production of additional material and human resources).

· There were not enough workers at the newly built plants and factories because of the low birth rate. Labor productivity has fallen.

The economy has become resistant to innovation. Only enterprises that worked for military orders were distinguished by high technology.

· The country's economy was militarized. Military spending grew twice as fast as national income.

· The civilian industry suffered losses. By the beginning of the 80s, only 10% - 15% of enterprises were automated. During the years of the 9th Five-Year Plan (1971-1975), economic growth stopped.

The appearance of the well-being of the national economy was provided through the sale of natural resources - gas and oil. "Petrodollars" were spent on the development of the eastern regions of the country, the creation of gigantic territorial-production complexes. The construction of the century was carried out (VAZ, KAMAZ). From 1974-1984 the Baikal-Amur Mainline (BAM) was built - 3 thousand km.

Agriculture remained the weakest industry in the 70s and 80s.. The old management system interfered with the independence of the heads of collective farms and state farms. Purchase prices for agricultural products were low, and for agricultural machinery - high. The state was forced to import grain (1979 - 1084 - 40 million tons per year).

AT In the 1970s, a campaign to the "second virgin lands" was widely launched- Non-Black Earth region (29 regions and republics of Russia). The main emphasis was placed on agro-industrial integration, i.e. the unification of agriculture with the sectors that serve it - industry, transport, trade. The mass liquidation of "unpromising villages" (200 thousand) began. In 1982, a food program was developed to solve the food problem in the USSR by 1990.

Crisis phenomena gradually accumulated in the social sphere. The rise in the living standards of the population stopped, there was a deficit, a hidden rise in prices. This became the economic prerequisite for the formation of a "shadow economy".

A similar situation in the countryside led to the fact that citizens began to massively move to cities, productivity fell, and by the end of the period of stagnation, a food crisis began to brew. Ukraine, Kazakhstan and other regions, whose main activity was agriculture and mining, had a particularly hard time during this period.

dissident movement. The internal policy of the Brezhnev administration was of a conservative nature ("neo-Stalinism").

Since the 2nd half of the 60s, criticism of the cult of Stalin was banned,

stopped the process of rehabilitation of the repressed,

The persecution of dissidents began.

In the 1970s, dissent flowed into the dissident movement, whose characteristic features were anti-communism and anti-Sovietism. (Academician A.D. Sakharov, writer A.I. Solzhenitsyn, musician M.A. Rostropovich).

Activity first dissidents(persons whose views were contrary to the official ideology) was aimed at improving the existing system, later - at abandoning it. Their most prominent representatives were: historian Roy Medvedev, writer A. I. Solzhenitsyn, physicist A. D. Sakharov. The main forms of activity of dissidents were demonstrations under human rights slogans, appeals to the leaders of the country and the courts in defense of the rights of certain individuals.

In 1966, a group of liberal-minded intelligentsia - artists, writers, musicians - addressed an open letter to L. I. Brezhnev. The letter dealt with the emergence of the danger of rehabilitation of I. V. Stalin and the inadmissibility of the revival of neo-Stalinism.

In 1968, participants in the human rights movement organized protest demonstrations in connection with the invasion of the troops of the USSR and other countries of the Warsaw Pact into Czechoslovakia.

In the 1970s, the confrontation between the opposition movement and the authorities intensified. The final departure of the party-state leadership from the reformist course, restrictions on the dissemination of information, the desire of the government to prevent the wide development of contacts between the intelligentsia and the outside world contributed to the activation of the opposition. The dissidents organized the publication abroad of literary works banned in the country (“Tamizdat”). The so-called uncensored press (Samizdat) emerged. Typewritten magazines ("Veche", "Memory"), the information bulletin of the human rights movement "Chronicle of Current Events" were published.

In the mid-1970s, dissidents organized a group in Moscow to promote the implementation of Helsinki Accords. The actions of the dissidents were regarded by the country's leadership as "harmful" and "hostile". Representatives of the dissident movement were persecuted, imprisoned (General Grigorenko), deported abroad (writer A. I. Solzhenitsyn).

Economic reforms in the mid-1960s. Reorganizations and reforms in the economy in the late 1950s and early 1960s did not lead to positive changes. The pace of economic development was falling. For the new leadership of the country, the need to continue economic reforms was obvious. The transformations affected primarily agriculture. In March 1965, firm plans for the purchase of agricultural products for several years ahead were introduced. Procurement prices for grain crops increased. Increased allowances to the current purchase prices for livestock. Collective farms were transferred to direct bank lending. Guaranteed wages for collective farmers were introduced. Restrictions were removed from the development of their personal farms. In the autumn of 1965, economic reform in industry began. It was preceded by a long discussion, which was attended by economic workers and prominent scientists and economists, including V. S. Nemchinov, L. M. Birman, and others. During the discussion, thoughts were expressed about the need to introduce full cost accounting and self-sufficiency of enterprises. These ideas were regarded as untimely, however, some principles were incorporated into the reform. market economy(profit, cost accounting). The adopted reform established the volume of sold products as one of the main indicators of the work of enterprises. The Soviets of the National Economy were abolished, and branch management was restored.

Programs for the creation of territorial production complexes were carried out. With their help, it was also supposed to strengthen the economic ties of the republics. Territorial production complexes were formed in Siberia (Krasnoyarsko-Achinsk), in Kazakhstan (Chimkenteko-Dzhambul), in Tajikistan and other regions. The Baikal-Amur Mainline (BAM) was being laid. The course towards the integration of the economies of the Union republics, directive management of the republican economies from the center caused disproportions in their structure. One of the consequences of this was public discontent and the growth of opposition sentiments in the union republics. In Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia, on the basis of economic contradictions, the desire to withdraw the republics from the USSR intensified. Separatist sentiments in them especially intensified in the 80s.

By the beginning of the 1980s, a powerful industrial potential had been created in the country. At the same time, priority attention to the sectors of the military-industrial and fuel and energy complexes exacerbated the deformations in the industrial structure. Directive management, insufficient consideration of regional characteristics of production led to a drop in the economic indicators of industrial development.