What is socialism? Developed socialism: definition, features, characteristics. Political development

On the one hand, this is an important concept of the theory of Marsism-Leninism, developed by the collective efforts of the CPSU, communist and workers' parties of fraternal socialist countries. On the other hand, this is a characteristic of the stage of development of socialism that has already been achieved in the Soviet Union and the construction of which continues in a number of other countries.

For the first time, the question of possible stages of development of socialism was raised by Lenin. He concluded that in its movement towards communism, a socialist society will go through a number of stages. Lenin believed that the creation of a “developed socialist society”, “complete socialism”, “complete socialism”, “complete socialism” would become possible only after the strengthening and consolidation of victorious socialism.

The first after the victory of the socialist revolution of 1917 was the transition stage from capitalism to socialism. In the second half of the 30s, a socialist society was basically built in the Soviet Union. In 1959, the CPSU concluded that socialism in the USSR had won a complete and final victory - not only internal, but also external sources of danger of the restoration of capitalism had been eliminated. From this moment the formation of a mature, or developed, socialist society begins.

The conclusion that such a society had been built in the USSR was first made by the party in 1967 - during the 50th anniversary of the socialist revolution of 1917. It was theoretically justified that developed socialism is a necessary, natural and historically long stage of social development.

Unlike the initial stages, developed socialism operates on its own, socialist basis. At the same time, in a developed socialist society, the economic and other laws of socialism receive full scope for their action, the advantages of the socialist way of life, its humane essence are revealed and realized to the greatest extent. A developed socialist society is characterized not only by high maturity social system in general and all its aspects - economic, social, political and spiritual, but also by the ever more proportionate development of these sides, their ever more optimal interaction.

Developed socialism is characterized by a number of characteristic features. This is a society in which powerful productive forces, advanced science and culture, in which the people's well-being is constantly growing. This is a society in which, on the basis of the rapprochement of all classes and social strata, the actual equality of all nations and nationalities inhabiting the country, their fraternal cooperation, a new historical community of people has emerged - the Soviet people. This is a society whose law of life is the concern of everyone for the welfare of everyone and the concern of each for the welfare of all.

It is at this stage of development of a socialist society that the prerequisites are created and the conditions are prepared for its gradual development into a classless, communist society.

Unfortunately, in reality, the construction of a society of developed socialism did not happen. Reality sometimes diametrically diverged from theory. Therefore, the successor L.I. Brezhnev, Andropov, already in 1982 announced that developed socialism would be improved, but this process was long, and it would take a long historical period. As history has shown, the theory turned out to be wrong, and instead of developed socialism and communism, Russia received the “wild capitalism” of the dashing 90s, and then the pseudo-democratic society of today. Therefore, during the period when the term “developed socialism” arose, it could be treated as a future reality. Now this is an obvious utopia!

The socio-political development of the USSR until the mid-1980s was determined by two political concepts - developed socialism and Soviet people as a new historical community. Increasing influence on the development of Soviet society, internal and foreign policy the country began to support the dissident movement.

At the turn of the 60s and 70s, a change in program milestones occurred: the concept of extensive construction of communism laid down in the third party program was replaced by the concept of developed socialism. Thus, the CPSU actually abandoned the solemn promise given at the XXII Party Congress that “the current generation Soviet people will live under communism." The main revisionists of the previous general course were the party leaders - L.I. Brezhnev, M.A. Suslov, Yu.V. Andropov. In their policy they were guided by the principle: "the movement is everything, the final goal is nothing" .New political concept was closer to life, it was created taking into account growing military spending to achieve and then maintain military-strategic parity with the United States and strengthen the borders with China.

The concept was first published in the report “Fifty Years of Great Victories of Socialism,” which General Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee Brezhnev spoke at a joint ceremonial meeting of the CPSU Central Committee, the Supreme Soviet of the USSR and the Supreme Soviet of the RSFSR in the Kremlin Palace of Congresses on November 3, 1967. In 1971 , at the XXIV Congress of the CPSU, it was proclaimed the highest stage in the development of Marxism-Leninism. Last time Yu.V. approached her. Andropov, in an article devoted to the teachings of K. Marx and the problems of building socialism in the USSR, published in 1983 on the 165th anniversary of the birth of the founder of Marxism. In the second half of the 80s, the period of dominance of this concept was called by M.S. Gorbachev's "period of stagnation."

The essence of the concept was that on the path to communism the stage of developed socialism is inevitable, at which it reaches its integrity, i.e. a harmonious combination of all spheres and relations - industrial, socio-political, moral, legal, material and ideological. Andropov clarified that this stage will be long, and the USSR is only at the beginning. The integrity of socialism was supposed to be achieved through its improvement.

Formation of financial capital
During the era of imperialism, the role of banks increased significantly. Banks are institutions that perform various monetary transactions, providing mediation in settlements between entrepreneurs and in credit. Banks provided cash loans to capitalists to expand production and trade. For this they charged a certain percentage. But the banks themselves...

Archaeological finds
The first archaeological finds proving the existence of Christianity in Crimea date back to the 3rd century, and the first Christian tombstone on the Crimean peninsula dates back to 304. The spread of Christianity in Chersonesos also dates back to this period - and, it seems, the preaching of the Gospel was not very unfriendly at first...

Results of economic development
The decline in economic growth rates began in the 9th Five-Year Plan (1971-1975). Over 15 years (1970-1985), growth rates fell to the level of economic stagnation (stagnation), contradictions acquired pre-crisis forms. As for the 11th Five-Year Plan, it was not fulfilled in any of the main indicators. In the history of the state five-year...

Theorists of socialism believed that it should have a higher level - developed socialism. The achievement of this stage was announced in the USSR in the second half of the last century. But was it actually achieved? Developed socialism is a stage of development of society in the USSR, about the beginning of which the leadership Soviet Union stated in 1967. The term was used general secretary Central Committee of the CPSU L.I. Brezhnev, who addressed citizens on the occasion of the 50th anniversary of the October Revolution.

The concept of developed socialism

The authors of this concept presented provisions that, in their opinion, were confirmed in Soviet reality. It was believed that the USSR had created the necessary material and technical base, the socio-economic situation of its citizens was improving, and the possibilities for meeting all needs were increasing. Party leaders believed that Soviet society was a cohesive mass in which serious conflicts. And, despite periodic problems in solving national question, it was declared that the goal had been successfully achieved. The concept of developed socialism included extensive ideological work. The role of scientific and technological progress and labor discipline increased, and the growth of the people's well-being was announced. To implement theoretical ideas in the Soviet Union, they began to pursue a new agricultural policy. The USSR was not only an industrial state, but also an agricultural one, so the authors of the concept stated the need to strengthen collective and state farms, to raise Agriculture and modernization of the countryside. The construction of developed socialism, according to theorists, was impossible without the transition of Soviet citizens to a fundamentally new way of life, which should have been based on updated postulates corresponding to the historical moment. It was believed that production sector it must be organized in such a way that it fully satisfies the material needs of the country and its population. It was planned to form high spirituality and morality, to give every person opportunities for comprehensive and harmonious development.

Developed socialism in practice

According to most historians, a society of developed socialism was not built in the USSR. Theory and practice diverged in many ways. In particular, Yu.V. Andropov, who replaced L.I. Brezhnev as party leader, announced in 1982 his intention to improve developed socialism, noting that this process would be quite lengthy. However, this did not happen, and a few years later, with the collapse of the Soviet Union, the country's path to developed socialism and communism came to an end completely.

The concept of developed socialism is an ideology of stagnation.

The change of course in October 1964 should inevitably entail a new ideological justification. Initially, the curtailment of Khrushchev's democratic initiatives was explained by the need to combat his subjectivism and voluntarism.

However, very soon a more detailed justification for the conservative domestic political course was required. This became the concept of “developed socialism"and the theory of the permanent aggravation of the ideological struggle between the socialist and capitalist systems as they move towards communism.

In Brezhnev’s speech at the celebration of the 50th anniversary of the October Revolution (1967), the conclusion about building a USSR“developed socialist society”, which took shape over time into a new holistic ideological concept of “developed socialism”. It was based on the very real fact of the creation of the foundations in the USSR industrial society. The authors of the concept expressed ideas of complete, albeit relative homogeneity of Soviet society, a final solution to the national question, and the absence of any real contradictions within society. Accordingly, its development was assumed to be conflict-free. This, in turn, led to the formation of a complacent and complacent perception of the surrounding reality among the leadership of the CPSU. Without sacrificing faith in communism, this concept transferred the task of its construction from the concrete historical plane (as required program CPSU) into the theoretical, pushing its implementation to for a long time. Moreover, the more difficult the situation in the economy and social sphere, the louder the reports about labor successes and achievements sounded.

It is not surprising that later the concept of “developed socialism” was called the “ideology of stagnation.”

The thesis about the aggravation of the ideological struggle stemmed, essentially, from Stalin’s position on the aggravation class struggle as we move towards socialism, which was founded in the 30s. the need for mass repression. Now the updated thesis was supposed to explain to the public the persecution of dissidents as a fight against “agents of influence” of the West, and to justify restrictions in spiritual life. These ideological innovations were reflected in the 1977 Constitution.
However real life people were less and less like “developed socialism”. The introduction of food rationing in the regions and the decline in living standards required “clarifications” in ideology. In 1982, Yu. V. Andropov put forward the idea of ​​“improving developed socialism” and announced that this would be a very long historical period.

The power of the nomenklatura. The organizers of the removal of N. S. Khrushchev from the post of First Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee were the Chairman of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR L. I. Brezhnev and other members of the senior party leadership. After Khrushchev was removed, Brezhnev took his place. Soon the first secretary became general, as was the case under Stalin. The change in the name of the position to a certain extent reflected a change in guidelines: instead of reform, a course towards preserving, as far as possible, existing relations in society; instead of de-Stalinization, an attempt to restore the image of Stalin as an outstanding party figure.
This change in guidelines reflected not only Brezhnev’s very conservative views, but - and this is the main thing - the interests of the party and state bureaucracy. This bureaucracy is also called the nomenklatura. Almost all leadership positions in the state and economic apparatus they demanded party recommendations. They were called nomenklatura, i.e. included in the list of positions administered by party authorities. Without the knowledge of these authorities, it was impossible to become the chairman of a collective farm and the director of a plant, the rector of an institute and the director of a school, much less a minister. The ministers belonged to the sphere of activity of the CPSU Central Committee; who to appoint as the director of the school was decided at the level of the district party committee. Essentially, the nomenklatura represented, in the words of the Yugoslav dissident M. Djilas, “a new ruling class».
The fact that a “dictatorship of the nomenklatura” was established in the country was reflected in the sixth article new Constitution USSR, adopted in 1977. It read: “The guiding and guiding force of Soviet society, its core political system, government and public organizations is the Communist Party of the Soviet Union." Even a tourist trip by a USSR citizen to socialist countries required approval from party authorities. The fate of the country depended on an army of officials, many of whom were party and Komsomol nominees who did not have proper vocational training.
Under Brezhnev, especially in last years his tenure at the head of the party and the state, all issues were not only prepared by the apparatus
workers, which, of course, was the case under Khrushchev, but, as a rule, they were predetermined by them. Moreover, since 1974 health Secretary General it worsened year by year, he began to have difficulty speaking and poorly perceive the essence of state affairs. In 1978, at the celebration of the 60th anniversary of the Komsomol, the decrepit Brezhnev, handing over a memorial banner, almost dropped it from his weakening hands. In the last years of his life, in the adoption of the most important government decisions A major role was played by the immediate circle of the Secretary General, which included members of the Politburo of the CPSU Central Committee - the head of the KGB Yu. V. Andropov, the Minister of Foreign Affairs A. A. Gromyko, the leading ideologist of the party M. A. Suslov, the Minister of Defense D. F. Ustinov, the secretary Central Committee of the CPSU K. U. Chernenko.
Economic problems. It was impossible to immediately curtail the economic reforms started by Khrushchev and objectively necessary for the country. They continued in the second half of the 60s, their implementation was associated with the name of the Chairman of the Council of Ministers A. N. Kosygin. The essence of the reform was the introduction of economic levers for enterprise management. It was envisaged to reduce the number of planned indicators, individual approach to remuneration, incentives for employees through income from profits. At the same time, there was a rejection of the system of territorial management of industry (the so-called economic councils), which was introduced under Khrushchev. Strict departmental centralization of all sectors of the economy was restored, which came into conflict with the proclaimed principles of reform. Ultimately bureaucratization economic life prevailed over the limited freedom of enterprises.
During the 70s - the first half of the 80s. the country's economy began to increasingly experience stagnation. First of all, this was expressed in a slowdown in the pace of development. Thus, compared with the 8-10% annual increase in industrial production from 1956 to 1965, it was only about 4% in 1976-1980.

Growth rates of a number of economic indicators in the USSR (in%)

	1966-1970	1971-1975	1976-1980	1981-1985
National income
Real income per capita
Retail turnover of state and cooperative trade
Volume of sales household services to the population

In conditions when the scientific and technological revolution (STR) was actively taking place in the West, mass computerization was launched, the production of traditional products (metal smelting, etc.) was increasing in the USSR, and a high specific share of unskilled labor remained. Things were better with high technology in the Soviet military-industrial complex (MIC), colloquially referred to as the “defense industry.” This sector grew at the expense of others, and the burden of military expenditures hampered the development of those industries that worked for the needs of the population. Soviet exports were dominated by raw materials. The country's economy and living standards of the population were largely supported by petrodollars, i.e. foreign exchange earnings received from the sale of oil and gas for export. But this revenue was not enough for all the needs; wear and tear gradually occurred. industrial equipment.
The lag in the agricultural sector was especially evident. The rural worker lived mainly at the expense of his personal plot and personal farming. Although collective farms switched from a system of workdays to monthly payment of wages, the labor of collective farmers and state farm workers was poorly paid. The yield was also low; a huge amount of grown products was lost during the harvesting period and during storage. Lack of material interest, petty party-Soviet tutelage, planned and financial restrictions on the use of available funds, and massive mismanagement led to the decline of agriculture. There was a shortage of food in the country, and the authorities could not solve the food problem.
The crisis of dogmatized ideology. It was clear to the party leadership that the program for building communism, adopted in 1961, was impossible to implement. But it could not decide on its official radical revision. In order to somehow reconcile “socialist reality” and communist utopia, it was proclaimed that “developed socialism” had been built in the USSR and that Soviet society was faced with the task of improving it. However, all propaganda efforts to create a prosperous facade of a society of “developed socialism” were nullified by reality: low indicators of the quality of life of the Soviet person, bureaucratization and corruption of the party-state apparatus, violations of social justice as a declared moral norm, an increase in critical attitude towards the official ideology and party leadership .
Many people no longer listened to the “voice of the party.” They turned to other voices: to tape recordings of songs by A. A. Galich and V. S. Vysotsky, imbued with rejection of Soviet reality, to broadcasts from foreign radio stations, to ideas gleaned from “forbidden literature,” to jokes ridiculing the leaders and the system. There were two ideologies in the country: the official Marxist-Leninist one and the informal, democratic one, oriented towards open-minded, free human thought.
Dissidence. The process of de-Stalinization, begun by Khrushchev's report at the 20th Congress of the CPSU, continued under Brezhnev. However internal content This process became different - it acquired the character of oppositional resistance to the regime.
In the fall of 1965, writers A. D. Sinyavsky and Yu. M. Daniel were arrested, secretly transporting their works of art abroad and published there under pseudonyms. Based on the content of these works, writers were accused of “anti-Soviet agitation.” On December 5, 1965, Soviet Constitution Day, a small group of young people protested on Pushkin Square in Moscow under the slogans “We demand a public trial of Sinyavsky and Daniel” and “Respect the Soviet Constitution.” Thus was born the human rights movement, which became the most important integral part new form opposition - Soviet dissidence (dissent). During the trial, Sinyavsky and Daniel were sentenced (to 7 and 5 years of strict regime, respectively), although they did not plead guilty.
The most famous figures of the dissident movement were one of the creators of Soviet thermonuclear weapons A.D. Sakharov and writer A.I. Solzhenitsyn. Academician Sakharov, in his book “Reflections on Progress, Peaceful Coexistence and Intellectual Freedom” and other speeches, developed the idea of ​​​​the convergence of two systems - socialism and capitalism, which could borrow each other’s achievements and positive sides. Solzhenitsyn gained worldwide fame thanks to his book “The Gulag Archipelago” (GULAG - Main Directorate of Camps), in which the picture was recreated based on documents and memories of prisoners Stalin's repressions and camp life.
Among the dissidents there were people of different views: socialist and liberal, religious and nationalist. But all of them were united by a rejection of Soviet reality and the Communist Party, and a desire to defend human rights and democratic ideals. There were few dissidents; they did not participate in any organizations. The activities of human rights activists consisted mainly of protests and the dissemination of literature critical of the Soviet order, published abroad (“tamizdat”) and illegally in the USSR (“samizdat”).
Dissidents were subjected to persecution: arrests and judicial reprisals, imprisonment in camps, exile, deportation abroad, and placement in psychiatric hospitals. By the beginning of the 80s. The dissident movement was almost eliminated by the KGB, but the ideas of human rights activists had already taken root in the public consciousness.
The deepening crisis of “developed socialism”. In the first half of the 80s, crisis phenomena in the life of Soviet society became increasingly obvious. In conditions when the scientific and technological revolution continued in the West, there was a transition to post-industrial society, The USSR was falling further and further behind in technical and economic terms. But the ruling party elite, represented by the elderly members of the Politburo, did not want, and could not, change anything. Various programs were adopted (for example, food), but the shortage of food products (especially meat products) not only did not decrease, but, on the contrary, increased. Imported clothes and shoes (domestic ones were of poor quality and unfashionable) were bought “under the counter” at speculative prices (there were almost no these goods in stores). The most necessary things disappeared from sale - soap, toothpaste etc. The “black market” of goods and services flourished.
Demagogic slogans were proclaimed from high stands, the propaganda machine of regional and district party committees, the Knowledge Society, newspapers and magazines, radio and television was in full swing, but there were fewer and fewer people who believed the slogans and promises. The belief that “Soviet is the best” was replaced by another: “Soviet is the worst.”
But, perhaps, most of all people were irritated by the bureaucratic arbitrariness and helplessness of the highest party and state nomenklatura. After Brezhnev’s death in November 1982, 68-year-old Politburo member Yu. V. Andropov, who had headed the State Security Committee for a long time, was elected General Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee. The seriously ill Andropov remained in the highest party post for only about a year and a half. The measures he took to improve labor discipline and combat corruption were not effective both because they were short-lived and because they were carried out using command-bureaucratic methods. In February 1984, Andropov died, and the post of General Secretary went to another who was old, infirm and, moreover, lacking merits statesman Politburo member K.U. Chernenko.