Effect of Changing Government on Russian Citizens Before and After the Fall of the Soviet Union - Research Paper Example

?Effect of changing government on Russian citizens before and after the fall of the Soviet Union  Introduction Problem ment The aim of the paperis to try and identify the economic conditions of the people after the collapse of the Soviet Union and the consequent change in government. For this purpose the economic conditions of the people before and after the fall are considered along with in order to capture the effect of the collapse. The study shall be based on some economic indicators like income, employment, and inequality.  Importance of the Question The change of political scenario had always affected the Russian citizens. In 1991 the people of Russia gained their electoral rights. However at what cost that right came is an important question. Reasons for choosing Soviet Union Every country during its transformation process undergoes economic turmoil. Russia had been a country that had experienced transformation of its political, economic, and social scenario several times in history. However the collapse of the Soviet Union had been a unique phenomenon. We want to study the effects of such collapse on the economic condition of the people. However unavailability of reliable data makes us do a both qualitative and quantitative study. (Ra’anan) Background: the fall of the Soviet Union The Soviet Union was formed in the aftermath of the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917. During that time the Joseph Stalin had exhibited his despotic rules. From 1953-64 Nikita Krushchev tried out her reforms but failed to make many changes. The reforms were not necessarily in the direction of liberalization. During this period the atrocities of the police was relaxed and the townsmen achieved a comparatively higher standard of living. The peasants were controlled by the state through the collective farms. They were the focus of much of the states concern, though that did not help their condition very much. The intellectual and the cultural life at the time of Khrushchev also performed fairly well. The educated and the civil society n the 1960s for the first time could express their desires. They expressed a desire to free themselves from the omnipresence of the state and gain individual autonomy. The rule of Kruschev saw the prevalence of oligarchy. His successor Brezchnev heightened the process becoming the chief oligarch within the ruling class. (Ra’anan, 77) From 1964 to 1982 Soviet Union saw an improvement in the material standards of their lives. However the state presence in the public life of the people was resumed. Censorship and the control of police came back. The ideologies of the parties found fewer takers from the common people. The detachment was aggravated by the growing corruption within the ranks of the party. As agriculture got less and less attention from the government investment in heavy industries and military kept rising. The non-Russian people had a growing discontent over several issues. After 1985 the controls of the state were taken over by a new group of leaders. They were the young leaders within the party. The dynamic leader Mikhail Gorbachev represented this pragmatic group of leaders. These people believed in reforms. They received an opposition within the ranks of their own party. The reformist policies of the group were in contrast to the hardliners. Gorbachev wanted to rejuvenate the country’s economy and political scenario through a series of reforms and turned to the intelligentsia for support. The former rule of control was relaxed and expression of ideas was relaxed. This led to a number of problems for the government as the civil society searched answers for the abuses of the previous governments. Under pressure the party moved towards a more pluralistic policy and constitutional government. In spite of all the changes and reforms undertaken by the government, the Gorbachev rule ceased to exist. The central institution was ruined and the people belonging to minor communities raised their voice in nationalist sentiment. The final demise came about in 1991. (Keep, 2-3) During the Gorbachev rule the general education of the public had been raised. The world outside USSR had been opened up to the people. People with higher levels of education formed a significant part of the society. They were more receptive to the idea of liberalization and privatization introduced in the time of Gorbachev and taken forward by Yeltsin. This liberated group of people welcomed the change. Beside this social impetus to the change, further push was created by the failures of the policies of the Gorbachev government. The rate of economic growth kept declining. Life expectancy among adult males and infant mortality rate was low. (Brown) Gorbachev’s reforms had suffered very badly. Still he continued his thoughts of socialism. However he was very detached from the aspirations of the public. Finally on December 25, 1991 Gorbachev gave up his position as the president. The new elected president of Russia was Yeltsin. Yeltsin declared a new line of development for the country in the lines of West and other developed countries of the world. The former ideologies of communism and organization over private ownership had become obsolete. After coming to power, Yeltsin focused on agendas like nation building. He intended to build a new economic and political order for the country and define the role of the nation in the international politics. (Brown, 49-51) Yeltsin also advocated policies that were directed towards shock therapy. He wanted to remove control of prices and privatize the industries and land. He called for a reduction of government expenditure and stringent monetary policies. (Kotz, 171-179) Theoretical explanation The fall of the Soviet Union and the consequent efforts to reform the economy had given rise to a terrible state of being for millions of citizen of the country. The Soviet economy had a basic safety net arrangement that ensured social and economic benefits. The guarantee of employment, healthcare, and subsidy in the price of the house ceased to exist under increased drives for market reforms. Judyth Twigg had mentioned that the impact of the state in ensuring a minimum level of sustenance and material comfort for the people had been immense. This made a case for the continuation of the Soviet Union’s regime. The poverty and social insecurity invaded the country deeply and hampered the national identity of the people. The women and the children were the worst affected in the country. Corruption was widespread especially against the women. The oligarch s used coercion to force the women out of their property. An oligarch, against the legitimate claims of the women employees acquired the typography plant in Central Moscow illegally. The corrupt privatization coupled with the rise in organized crimes left very few options for the women. The traffickers exploited the vulnerable situation. Even in the Gorbachev era prostitution had been a thriving business. After the collapse of Soviet Union large number of young women turned to prostitution for supporting themselves. Serving the foreigners and business people visiting Russia became a mode of income for them. (Lane, 209-210) The birth rate fell which exhibited a growing monetary insecurity among the people. Alcoholism and drug abuse became a growing trend among the people since the fall of Soviet Russia. It exhibited the psychological impact on the people. During the regime of the Soviet Union the education system was well developed. They achieved a high level of literacy. However after the collapse there was a high differentiation. Some high-class people achieved high education, but the drop out from elite institutes was large. The immediate effect of the fall of Soviet Union was grave for all the new countries. (Kuchins, 9-12) The Impact In the two decades from 1980 to 2000, Russia went through huge political and social changes. A political and social transformation has huge consequence on the economy of the country. The lives of the people are disrupted to a large extent. Poverty One of the initial effects of political and social transformation in countries has always been the rise of poverty. In Russia during this period the poverty increased from 3% to 25% of the population. As an impact of the transition the estimates show that almost a quarter of the people had been affected. The Russian Longitudinal Monitoring Survey using their official poverty line conducted a study. It suggested that the ratio of household is Russia earning as low as half of the country’s official poverty line had increased from 3% to 20% from 1992 to 1996. The drop in income had adversely affected the diet of the people in the country. Study suggests that problem of malnutrition of child was less acute before the fall of the Soviet Union. The fall in income was also associated with a fall in employment. (Ellman) Employment The period of fall of the Soviet Union and the consequent rise of the democratic government was accompanied by a recession in the country. It led to a fall in employment in the formal sector. All the countries of former Soviet Union experienced this fall in employment. It was most pronounced in Albania where employment shrank by 76.9 %. In Russia the drop in employment was 86.5%. The fall of employment   in the formal sector affects the people negatively. It gives rise to fall in income of the household, social pressure and gives an incentive for criminalization of the society. Drop in employment was disproportionate with more female workers losing their jobs than their male counterparts. There had also been growth of other trends like wage arrears and taking up part jobs involuntarily. Payment in kind, irregular payments or partial payment also became prevalent. In Russia the unemployed labor force became 14.2%. As a result of the fall in income and employment inequality was raised. (Ellman) Inequality The transformation of Soviet Union to Russia gave rise to a huge inequality in income. Measurement of inequality involves a certain amount of ambiguity because of the definition and coverage. There are other problems like inclusion of taxes, time period, and the measure of inequality used. For Russia the Gini coefficient doubled during the period from 1987-88 to 1993-95 from 24 to 48. It implies that inequality doubled during this period. (Ellman) Distribution of Income In the decade of adjustment after the break up the Soviet Union the Russian Economy had contracted by almost 40%. It had also seen wide controversy around policies of the government like privatization. This has given rise to activities like permanent redistribution. The businessmen resist any institutional change that does not enable them to acquire property rights below the market price. It has resulted in distortion of the investment environment through stripping of assets and thefts. Frequent flight of capital and barriers to entry of market are also present. The government of Putin abstained from the appropriation of the wealth of the oligarch. According to him this would lead a destabilization of the economy and the political system. However he sought to redefine the relationship between the oligarchs and the state. (Smith, 129-130; Kuchins, 9-12)  Women In the Soviet Union, women participation in the labor force as well as in social activities was high. Nevertheless there power in the society was partly subdued by the male participation; they were highly respected in the society in the entire period of Soviet Union regime. The female employment rate outside the household was as high as 90% especially in the agricultural activities. However they had to face the double burden of labor – contribute to the agricultural activities as well as look after the household including child rearing. The rural women worked longer hours than the urban women. The participation of the women in more skilled jobs was low. The law did not recognize the mutual ownership in the family. Hence many women found themselves stripped of property rights after a divorce. (Denisova, Mukhina, 9). The Marxist-Leninist feminist stance towards women called for equal women participation in all walks of life. Contrary to this was the post-Soviet Russia views which wanted women to cling on to family and domestic activities. Female representation in politics dropped markedly. The discrimination was justified as putting women to their original roles as mothers and homemakers. Gorbachev originally proposed the idea in his book ‘Perestroika’. An overall change towards the women occurred in Post-Soviet Russia. It resulted in the rise of disguised unemployment and women poverty as well as drop in the living standards of the family formerly dependent on double income. The effect was more pronounced on the young single women, single mothers, and older women. In search of income they often turned to the informal sector- ‘the oldest profession’ or begging. Pictures of Old women begging or selling goods in cold temperatures attracted sympathy of the west (Kay, 95). Women turned to prostitution sometimes to sustain their families and at other times to fund their education. Different forms of trade like Internet dating and ‘mail-order-bride’ flourished. (Hass, 174) Concluding remarks In the aftermath of the collapse of the Soviet Union the government of Russia embarked on a path of liberalization and privatization. The former system of socialism and state operated enterprises were no longer there. Previously investment on industries was mostly public rather than private. This took care of the problems of employment and income for the common people. As the country embarked on a path of market domination and liberalization the government supports were withdrawn. Simultaneously the old social structure crumbled. The position of the women in the society was reduced to mere homemakers and child bearers. The country had faced ethnic problems coupled with nationalism from the peripheral region during the time of Gorbachev. The problem was further aggravated after the collapse. Such ethno-nationalistic feeling leading to ethnic tensions was also experienced in Russia. Russians suspected the non-Russian of taking away their jobs. The prosecution by Putin of oligarchs also triggered such sentiments. Oligarchy was a huge problem for the redistribution of Russia, which made the wealth distribution of the country highly skewed. A few rich people held astounding amount of wealth and inequality was extreme. On one hand 33% of the countries citizen earned less than $100 per month, on the other hand 36 people held around 25% of the country’s GDP (Hass, 172). Apart from the problem of distribution there was also a problem of misallocation of resources in the country. A rise of the mid-economic class was experienced mainly around Moscow. However the effect on the academicians and teachers due to less support from the government was adverse. There was a fall in salary and sometimes only partial salary was received. As a result development of human capital suffered. All this led to stunted growth of the country. However this stunted growth rate was not evident due to the overestimation of the economy in the initial days after the collapse.. Growth of the country and size of the economy had been a problem for Russia mainly due to overestimation. However after the fall of the Soviet Union the economy had been reassessed. Vladimir Putin had announced a target of 7% growth rate for the country in 2001(Kuchins, 9-12). If the target growth rate can be achieved and the wealth generated can be distributed evenly among the middle class of the country, it will lead to considerable economic development.   Bibliography 1. Brown, Archie, Reform, Coup, and Collapse: The End of Soviet State, BBC, February, 17, 2011, May 12, 2011, from: (February, 17, 2011) 2. Brown, Archie. Gorbachev, Yeltsin and Putin: political leadership in Russia’s transition,  Lilii?a? Fedorovna Shevt?s?ova, 2001 3. Ellman, Michael, The Social Costs and Consequences of the Transformation Process, UNECE, May 12, 2011, from: http://www.unece.org/ead/sem/sem2000/ellman.pdf 4. Keep, John, L., A History of the Soviet Union 194-1991, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2002. 5. Kotz, D.M. & Fred Weir, Russia’s path from Gorbachev to Putin: the demise of the Soviet system and the New Russia, United Kingdom, Taylor & Francis, 2007 6. Kuchins, Andrews, Russia after the Fall, Washington D.C. Carnegie Endowment, 2002, 7. Lane, David, S., The Legacy of State Socialism and the Future of Transformation, Maryland, Rowman and Littlefield, 2007, pp210 8. Ra’anan, U. Flawed Succession: Russia’s power transfer crises, Maryland, Lexington Books. 2006 9. Smith, Gordon B. State Building in Russia: The Yeltsin Legacy and the Challenge of the Future, M.E. Sharpe, 1999  10. Densiova, Liubov & Irina Mukhina, Rural Women in the Soviet Union and Post-Soviet Russia, United Kingdom, Taylor & Francis, 2010. 11. Kay, Rebecca. Russian Women and their Organization: gender, discrimination and grassroot women’s organization. 1991-96, Basingstoke, Palgrave Macmillan, 2000. 12. Hass, Jeffrey Kenneth, Economic Sociology: an introduction, United Kingdom, Taylor & Francis, 2006. Read More