Dr Pervez Hoodbhoy
Banned
I think he came out something like 3% behind Yeltsin in the 1996 presidential elections, so WI he had won instead?
Gennady Zyuganov, President of Russia
- Thread starter Dr Pervez Hoodbhoy
- Start date
He'd probably have followed China's example in state-controlled "capitalism".
Then again another Yeltsin/Gorbachov-type may have won the next election...assuming Zyuganov can't stem the creeping tide!
Then again another Yeltsin/Gorbachov-type may have won the next election...assuming Zyuganov can't stem the creeping tide!
I think he wanted to nationalize the vodka industry and use that to fund various things.
I was thinking along the lines of capitalism (small c) as opposed to Capitalism (large C).
Some kind of restricted state sanctioned corporate wealth.
Some kind of restricted state sanctioned corporate wealth.
Actually, Zyuganov had a far smaller chance of winning in 1996 than you might think. The modern Communist Party of the Russian Federation (CPRF) is not quite the revanchist bogeyman that the Russian and Western media make it out to be. While much of the rank-and-file are still solidly communist, the party leadership has remained under the aegis of a number of old CPSU apparat, and they maintained plenty of contacts with the oligarchic elite, including such “bourgeois” figures as Boris Berezovsky, Vladimir Gushinsky, and Vladimir Potanin.
Politically, Zyuganov has toed the Yeltsin party line for the course of the 1990s. In 1993, he pretty much sat out the constitutional crisis, even though many within his party sided with the deputies in the White House. As a result, Zyuganov’s communists were spared by Yeltsin while a raft of other far-left parties were shut down in the coming months. The CPRF’s campaign in 1996 was fairly lackluster, with Zyuganov bowing out of the race long before the results from the second round of voting were in, even though he claimed that the first round of voting was rigged against him. In 1998, the CPRF’s reaction to the August crash came in the form of a small demonstration on October 12, almost two months later. In 1999, the communists refused to ally themselves with the recently-ousted prime minister, the popular leftist Yegevny Primakov, preferring to back Yeltsin’s new candidate, the liberal Sergi Kiriyenko.
This evidence suggests strongly that the CPRF is not so much an independent party than a sponge used by the Kremlin to collect leftist protest votes into a controllable vehicle. If the CPRF had won in 1996, I suspect that Zyuganov would have acquiesced to the use of “administrative resources” (altering the totals on the voter rolls, shuffling CPRF votes into smaller leftist parties) by the Yeltsin team to secure themselves a victory.
Politically, Zyuganov has toed the Yeltsin party line for the course of the 1990s. In 1993, he pretty much sat out the constitutional crisis, even though many within his party sided with the deputies in the White House. As a result, Zyuganov’s communists were spared by Yeltsin while a raft of other far-left parties were shut down in the coming months. The CPRF’s campaign in 1996 was fairly lackluster, with Zyuganov bowing out of the race long before the results from the second round of voting were in, even though he claimed that the first round of voting was rigged against him. In 1998, the CPRF’s reaction to the August crash came in the form of a small demonstration on October 12, almost two months later. In 1999, the communists refused to ally themselves with the recently-ousted prime minister, the popular leftist Yegevny Primakov, preferring to back Yeltsin’s new candidate, the liberal Sergi Kiriyenko.
This evidence suggests strongly that the CPRF is not so much an independent party than a sponge used by the Kremlin to collect leftist protest votes into a controllable vehicle. If the CPRF had won in 1996, I suspect that Zyuganov would have acquiesced to the use of “administrative resources” (altering the totals on the voter rolls, shuffling CPRF votes into smaller leftist parties) by the Yeltsin team to secure themselves a victory.
The same reason why the "Communists" in China support (or turn a blind eye to) full-blown, damn-near-dog-eat-dog capitalism (I'd say they support it, judging from what's shown on State TV - yes, I watch a few shows on the occasion). The same reason why Gorbo, a so-called communist, supported perestroika and that other idea (forgot the name; it's been years.)Max Sinister said:
Da! That would be it! It's been years and years since I last studied anything about European history, and the term just escaped my mind.fenkmaster said:
HueyLong
Banned
Perestroika (restructuring) allowed local managers and planners more autonomy. It also supported a move to consumer good production rather than heavy, military manufacturing.pieman3141 said:
Glasnost (openness) meanwhile, opened up the press for criticism of the government, and started the move towards basic human rights for Soviet citizens.
Neither of these really resemble the system China set into place.......
Max Sinister
Banned
pieman3141 said:
OK, the Communists in China do that. But they're still the single government party and made a switch. And China still has many Communist elements ("iron rice bowl": Everyone gets at least the amount of food to live - not much, but as I said, they can live.). However, Russia has a multi-party system now, and I suppose the Communists still take Communism seriously.