Can't be unseen...

No... Why did you woke us

It was a Soviet joke. Brezhnev: "Okay, enough of the fun, let us get serious" *removes brow and places it under his nose*

@@xxxrrrxxxrrr screw you 😂😂

@@xxxrrrxxxrrr 😀😀😊

Lol

What about Malenkovs toupee or Kaganovich own soup strainer?

Anne Scholey *the plot thickens* ... there may be a dossier on them 🤔

What did I just read? Maybe my mustache understands

In fact, Khrushchev got rid of most of the hair on his head, just to be on the safe side.

Whenever I see Steve Buscemi I see Nucky Thompson.

ben5056 That was such a bitchin’ movie.

he’s on the fucking ground

@@WhiteCamry Animal Blundetto

That movie was so funny! Michael Palin was great too

Well just *let your balalaika sing*

"Много ти знае балалайката."

We also use the same meaning of the word in Egypt, incidentally :D

wow...we are glad we can contribute!

Surely you need to cite references that are credible and have evidence to back up your supported arguments and theories... a KZfaq video doesn’t provide that 😂

@@Clarke5409 It's often considered good form to cite authors that have influenced your thinking on a subject, even if you don't use them as a source

​@@TheColdWarTV since the subject was brought up (albeit a couple months ago), would it be possible that you guys could add in the sources that you utilize to make your videos in the description? Your channel (as well as Kings and Generals) has been my go-to for killing time on my lunch breaks for over a year now, so it would be cool to dive deeper into some of the content!

Probably better to be reffering to written documentation than youtube videos (especially at master's level)

More accurately: the Great Soviet Encyclopedia. As I remember, it had been lauched in 1950's, and contained 30 volumes. I sometimes used it in libraries. However, I grew up with the Latvian Soviet Encyclopedia which contained just 10 volumes but was fresher than the Great Soviet one. It has been lauched all the 1980's - simultaneously with my school time.

@@ivarkich1543 this one on the table had one volume

We learned about Russia from library fact books. What fun they were.

We still love our bureaucracy, lol.

They love bureaucracy so much they put more bureaucracy on top of the bureaucracy over the bureaucracy.

That is the only way to distribute goods and services without money...

And we know how well they work...

Still a problem today in former Warsaw Pact nations. Old habits are hard to break.

CGP Grey when

You should go to useful charts. Wrong channel 🤪🤪🤪

yeah. too much talking. not enough showing.

I always thought he would play Paradox Games. Now we have proof.

@@williamepps9519 exactly 💯

no Paradox games for this host...takes too long for a simple mind like mine to figure out the UI!!

@@TheColdWarTV The first boss in any Paradox game.

Every single thing has to be compared to a damned video game. You kids today!

probably because they were the same as the Soviet Union ones, since it was the biggest

In contrast to the other SSRs, the Russian SFSR had no Communist Party of its own (there was only the CPSU, which managed Russia directly), and hence the RSFSR government was more or less ceremonial.

@@christianagi Ahh ok cool. I didn't know that.

@@christianagi Communist party of Russian sfsr was formed in 1990 and banned in 1991

Russia basically played the role of England in the USSR’s UK.

This would be great! I am interested to see what actual autonomy the SSR's had in the Soviet " federal" system and what difference existed in the political structure of the different republics ( if any).

Bruh.

As for the political part, I'm not sure, but I'll tell you about the economy. The planning system became more complex by the 1960s, as it was difficult to keep track of everything centrally, and understanding the entire economy became more difficult. Prior to this, the planning system worked successfully with the use of "price pressure", which regulated the balance between tops and bottoms. The essence of antagonism is as follows: from below they want to get more resources and do less work, and vice versa from above. Enterprises are motivated to hide resources from planners when planners need to know the information. Under Stalin, for ensuring information awareness, the institution of state planning commissioners was created. They did audits and stuff. To the question of how the planned system stimulated scientific and technical progress, special funds were created, for which the directors of enterprises were responsible, who could freely dispose of the fund to increase labor productivity. Plus bonuses and allowances for workers. "Price press" regulated the profit of the enterprise. The smaller the press, the more profit from a little work, the stronger the press, the less profit from more work. The complication of the economy of the USSR has led to some problems in determining prices. So, in the hope that the people, in accordance with liberal dogmas, will better understand how to manage resources, it was decided to slightly shift the powers from top to bottom. At first, this gave impetus, and then led to the fact that enterprises simply began to concentrate resources at themselves with a decrease in production returns. This led to a drop in the rate of economic growth. At some point, everything was canceled back. And so centralization and decentralization succeeded each other several times. In parallel, work was underway on the development of a nationwide automated accounting system (OGAS) and the development of intersectoral balance methods (this is from the field of linear programming). We define a vector of consumer goods, perform calculations, and get a result that shows how resources should be used to reach the final vector of consumer goods. A promising direction, which unfortunately has not found further development after the fall of Soviet Union. Incidentally, the planning at the very top is not very detailed. A general plan is formed, which then goes to a lower level, where it is detailed, then to a lower level and is detailed there. And so on down to individual enterprises. I watched a lecture on the channel "Prime Numbers" (so far only available in Russian) and somewhere I even slipped the idea that the material and technical base of a planned economy can lead to the fact that people will vote not for people or parties , but for the further vector of development proposed to society. From the lecture, I made my personal conclusion about that. That the cause of crises and the collapse of the USSR lies in the economy (moreover, the problems are not obvious and not at all the ones that the liberals talk about) and further consideration can lead to their solution and the construction of an effective planned economy. After the civil war, at the dawn of the formation of the USSR, it was necessary to build the means of production. After that to inctease them. Then it was necessary to prepare for the Second World War. After the war, it was necessary to restore the destroyed economy. Then, it was necessary to arm during the Cold War. Everything was directed to the production of means of production. And the production of goods stalled. People got tired of it and they supported the liberal reforms, the consequences of which we are still raking. In addition, the political leadership set too many tasks for the state, so there were simply not enough resources to fulfill them. For example, you have a limited number of bricks, but if you decide to build too many houses, then you will simply have some of them unfinished, and if resources are distributed evenly, in general, this problem can become massive. In general, planning is a complex, science-intensive, serious matter that requires careful study. This is a very powerful tool, and if used incorrectly, it can lead to big problems. However, the benefits are worth the effort.

​@@nortonnevis7252 what the fuck

Not really complicated. The structure legally and formally was typical for any western country. The key word here is "formally". The USSR had a parliament of two houses, a government, ministries and courts which formally represented the three power branches of any democratic country. But in fact, the Communist party was only real governing power over all the three formal power branches. Actually, it was a one party dictatorship.

I would like to know how the decentralised soviets were intended to work, why they had enough local support to come into existence and how they worked in practice before the central party took over all their power in the 1920s.

1. Central committee - basically Parliament that consisted of only the Communist party. Used to make speeches and pass laws. 2. Politburo - a group of the most influential Central committee members. They made actual executive decisions. 3. Secretariat - they were in charge of implementing the plans and making managerial decisions. Also the leader of the Soviet Union was the head of the Secretariat. That's how I understand it.

So if you want to exploit workers and make a lot of money in the process then pick usa. Sounds about right.

Except if you was born in ethnic republics (from where everything was taken to Moscow and few other capitals like Kyiv), or from village, or from Kolkhoz - where you had no passports until 1981, so you could not receive education, change job or even move outside of your village/Kolkhoz.

The United States was not designed to be a democracy, but a Constitutional, representative republic.

@@petebondurant58 Representative of what ?

The electoral college in part was designed to get people to compromise when making deals so that they can avoid polarization in politics in part, aka what has been happening now. In part it is to prevent the majority from tearing apart the minority. Personally I am not much of a political person (anymore) but as Washington said, there should be NO POLITICAL parties. PERIOD. ONLY independents, because parties too often become political weapons or more appropriately sock puppets.

@@michaelhintz7679 How do you ban or prevent political parties or factions? Every nation-state evolves into at least two factions. The Romans had the Optimates and the Populares. This is the way of things.

@@petebondurant58 Everyone will be forced to be independents, so candidate A represents Candidate A. As to preventing them, that is called voting them out and transparency.

Communist party of Russian sfsr was formed in 1990 and banned in 1991... If it was formed earlier the real defaco leader of the country ( general secretary) will jave his power reduced significantly and it can lead to many structural and organizational conflicts in the already bizzarre structure of the country....

Geidi Prime.

the man of steel, indeed

Eventually, we will get to the Gorbachev years

@@TheColdWarTV---Awesome.

Farewell of Slavianka

Здоров!

Farewell of Slavyanka, urod.

@@OstapVasilevschi Zdorovenko buly, kakel

You will perhaps find it more to your liking from the speakers we have in Kolyma, Comrade. :)

@@rodchallis8031 AAh the good old days of raves in Kolyma

@UCvweiN_aS_b6FVwdKB3tdCg Dark days for us all then. Dosvedanya and God Speed on your quest.

Farewell of Slavyanka

Will you sacrifice your own life for Pakistan?

@@tylerbozinovski4624 With Great Pleasure 🤗

The pepsi for warships thing unfortunately didn't happen. Got me bummed out as fuck