NOTE: Free essay sample provided on this page should be used for references or sample purposes only. The sample essay is available to anyone, so any direct quoting without mentioning the source will be considered plagiarism by schools, colleges and universities that use plagiarism detection software. To get a completely brand-new, plagiarism-free essay, please use our essay writing service.
One click instant price quote
... aking. One has to remember that the Cold War dominated many plans, with the drive for eastern superiority governing this sector. However, many of the policies were ill thought out with little foresight, with historians such as McCauley arguing this as a key trait of Khrushchev. An example of this lack of planning could be seen in the late fifties, when the president ordered the quantity of beef produced to increase.
Farmers promptly went out and slaughtered every cow in sight. This obviously increased short-term yields, but drastically cut long term ones. This highlights how policy was hastily made, with little thought, the only goal being to better the western output. One has to argue that if Moscow faced no competition from Washington, then maybe policy would have been better thought out, with a better structure and long-term aims.
One has to thus site that the threat from the west was partly responsible for dictating policy, which gave Solidarity something to exploit years later. However, one has to debate the significance of the economy in communism's collapse, as although it failed to provide everything the population wanted, Communist economics was not totally contrary to the public's wishes. There was an increase in the prices paid to farmers and free health care plans offered to their families. In 1975, the government's agricultural policies were rated positive by 81 % of the farming population. This community made up a massive population of the Poles, thus the surprising show of support that it gave the government in the mid seventies must be seen as proof that the government did not alienate the entire population over its economic policies in the era leading to its fall. Although this provided short-term stabilisation for the government, overall, the economy was probably highly responsible for weakening the government, as it proved to the people its ultimate weakness as an institution.
The economy made Communism unacceptable to the people by failing to provide for them, however, Communism in general was made to seem improper as it preached Marxism, but delivered a system of government that did not demonstrate egalitarianism in practice. The Communists kept the best jobs, the highest salaries went to them, and the best houses, whereas people lower down the Communist hierarchy suffered immeasurably. Poland Today observed that "the socialism that people see is compared to the socialism they want to see, and the discrepancy between reality and their standards is painful." Mason, in Public Opinion and Political Change in Poland argued that the Poles were happy with the concept of Socialism, as "only 25 % of young people showed democracy as an important characteristic of a good social system" This demonstrates what people wanted was not so much democracy and capitalism, they did not want the West recreated in Poland, they actually wanted corruption rooted out of government, and egalitarianism enforced. This can be seen as " 56 % selected human rights as an important characteristic (of a good social system), putting it in second place behind equality." Solidarity captured these grievances, priding itself on the way in which the proletariat labourers worked with intellectuals. Thus one can see the inter-relation of factors in weakening Communism, the corruption in the government and social structure creating conflict, and Solidarity channelling this to weaken the government. One can argue Communism was fated from the beginning, as Polish people hated Russia, thus anything Russian endorsed would never command respect and support, thus a nationalist, Solidarity style movement was inevitable.
In 1919 a Polish-Soviet war occurred, where Russia tried to impose Communism, also numerous border disputes followed. A connection in Polish minds would also be made between Russia and brutality after Tsarist rule forcibly Russified the population, also when Stalin had Polish officers shot at Katyn during the war. In the Cold-War context Communism became identified with Russia, which, ironically, would further undermine it in Poland because of this historic hatred. The U.
S. S. R ruled its satellites with an iron hand, especially in Stalin's time. One can see that the average Poles life would have been Russified, due to central planning dictating the country's economic and social policies, Konrad Shop wrote: Yet in the first two years of this, one of the most brutal occupations in human history, the savagery of the Russians exceeded that of the Germans. The Russians had a long experience (probably inherited from the Czars and enthusiastically continued) in the effective application of psychological terror. This combination of Russian abuse and dictation, towards a nation whose tradition was anti-Russian would have unquestionably created sufficient grievances for the people to want to overthrow this rule, showing how Communism was weakened from the start so much that its fall was probably inevitable.
This animosity can only have been accentuated by the failure and lack of popularity connected to Russian-endorsed policies, such as collectivization undermining the government. The fact that Communism appeared doomed from its start due to Russian origins reveals how the fall was probably inevitable as, quite simply, it had no place in Poland. The context of the Cold War can have only aggravated the already large problem of Russian hatred in Poland, as this brought the two countries closer together. Agreements such as 'Cominform' in 1947 and the 'Warsaw Pact' of 1955 show how the two nations were achieving a sense of unity over the heads of the people.
One can argue both of these as reactions to western proceedings: Cominform has been argued by many as a response to the western Marshall plan, and the Warsaw Pact as an answer to NATO. Due to Poland's important geographical position (in between the west and eastern zones) it was essential for Russia to keep Poland communist, so that they acted as a barrier to the evils of capitalism. Thus it is fair to cite that the context of the Cold War only intensified Russian attempts at authority over Poland, angering the people and undermining communism. The Cold War also turned the people against Russia, as Poland was subject to stifling censorship angering many, especially the intellectual circles. Stalin previously believed this isolation from the west, and censorship of the press crucial viewing it necessary to prevent any form of revolt against the regime. When Khrushchev came to power he denounced Stalin, hoping to strengthen his own position and create a platform which could be used for Cold War negotiations.
This had a negative effect in Poland, with an uprising occurring in October 1956, known as the 'Polish October', calling for this isolation to cease, as well as better conditions for workers. The people eventually gained some concessions, but this important example clearly illustrates how people resented the isolation and censorship imposed by Moscow, this made even worse by the Cold War context. The change in Russia's policies concerning its satellites was also fundamental in undermining Communism, as the Poles witnessed a total mutation of the Stalinist values they connected with the regime. By the late seventies Soviet rule could only be described as horribly twisted Marxism, as leaders built "luxurious country houses" for themselves. "According to one famous joke... at the time Brezhnev showed his...
mother round the new... house that he had just built; his mother commented 'It's wonderful... But what happens if the communists come back to power?' '" When Brezhnev died in 1982 and Andropov took over, the Kremlin realized that to quell the possibility of revolution the introduction of policies which could disassociate Communism with corruption were needed. These undermined the government as they confirmed to the Poles that their Soviet governor was improper and anyone that had come to power with the Soviets behind them.
Thus this undermined Greek, the then Prime Minister. Solidarity would obviously have been able to capitalise on this, expressing to the people that Soviet leaders were now recognizing partly what they had been campaigning against. Gorbachov further undermined Communism with "glasnost" and "perestroika" - his attempt to separate Communism and corruption in the minds of the people. Glasnost allowed the people to be told of atrocities that had been committed by Communists, such as the Katyn massacre, where 10 000 Polish officers were killed for no more reason than to allow Stalin to remove Poland's traditional leadership. This was trying to confirm the governments new genuine attitude, however proved to be a spectacular blunder as people now associated the government with corruption and non-egalitarianism to a greater degree than previously. Whereas Stalin had always impressed the greatness of communism on the people, Gorbachov effectively showed its multiple weaknesses, this providing confirmation for the people, that they wanted democracy and capitalism.
Glasnost had allowed Solidarity to achieve the whole-hearted support of the people and the end of the Brezhnev reign of terror, (likened by Andrew Chambers as "return to Stalinism", regarding the discipline and corruption) allowed Solidarity to practice what it preached without fear of force. The withdrawal of force meant that the Polish government would not have been confident in crushing Solidarity, leaving it free to undermine Communism with its marches and demonstrations, proving that without the context of Soviet repression Solidarity would not have been able to achieve quite such a powerful position. One has to question why Gorbachov's relaxation of power led was so ill fated compared to Khrushchev's denunciation of Stalin. I would argue that the international climate had significantly changed in the thirty years since 1956 with relations between east and west improving greatly, to the extent that Poland was no longer needed as a security measure, be it as an ally forming the USSR, or merely a barrier against the west. The Cold War context had been lifted. There had also been a further three decades for people to allow grievances to materialise, making the task to holding onto Poland seem impossible as well as pointless.
To use a metaphor, it is fair to say that by the mid eighties communism was completely fated in Poland, and the introduction of Gorbachov's new policies merely allowed a massive ball of antagonism to start rolling. Khrushchev had also tried to desperately reverse his denunciations, negotiating with the Poles, and using force in Hungary where similar events occurred, also in the mid fifties, although this resentment 'ball' was present, it was not so big. Thus one has to cite that the lightening of the Cold War context gave this ball of grievances the push it needed to start rolling and the fact that no one stood in its way this time allowed it to crush communism. To help decide whether Solidarity, or the changing context of Soviet power, was more important in undermining Communism one can consider the timing of Eastern European reform. Hungary actually pre-dated Poland in allowing freedom of association and in removing Western border controls. However, Poland, forced by another economic crisis worsened by Solidarity, was the first European country to hold free elections, with Solidarity gaining the majority of seats.
Communism fell more quickly (and peacefully compared with Russia) in Poland because it had already been clearly undermined by Solidarity. The individual significance of certain elements in undermining Communism differs very much depending on ones stance; for example, a peasant sees religion as an allegiance, a Communist leader sees it as a power base, I see it as an important part in the creation of sides. This can alter ones perception of the weight attached to different causes undermining. The easiest way to define is a three way system: Long term causes - (hatred of Russia, antagonism between Church and state) then shorter term causes (and problems of Russian authority created by the Cold War, also economic grievances) then immediate causes (Solidarity and change in Russia's foreign policy) in undermining Communism. These all contributed, but in different ways: Some (religion, Russiffication and Solidarity) created a significant divide between state and people, whereas others (economic grievances and low standards of living) merely turned people against the government. Importantly, they both weakened, as they created sides; of course, without a notable division conflict does not occur, but then one also needs sources of antagonism to create these sides.
In conclusion even though Solidarity, which grew from strikes, was operational for a short time period I believe it crystallised existing grievances against the Communist regime. These existing grievances (Russian domination fostered and aggravated in the Cold War context, forceful imposition, low living standards, lack of consumer goods and suppression of Religion and national characteristics) had already undermined communism as an ideology, whereas Solidarity united these very different causes of antipathy into one central wish for reformation, undermining the structure of Communism as a system, and as a power, in Poland. Therefore, Communism would be very quickly overthrown when a context of Soviet power is replaced with one of glasnost and Russian non-intervention. Thus one has to conclude that Solidarity was fundamental in the unification of grievances, so essential in the creation of the common cause, however this would have been useless if Russia had adopted a Stalinist foreign policy, and imposed beliefs, rather than Gorbachov allowing freedom.
I therefore conclude that although Solidarity was an important cause in undermining Communism, Gorbachov relaxing the Brezhnev doctrine was the most important cause as although very short-term, it represented the relaxation of Soviet power in Poland, which was not stopped as it had been in 1956.
Free research essays on topics related to: cold war, short term, term causes, important characteristic, long term
Research essay sample on Cold War Term Causes
