Do you now live a thousand times better than during Soviet times?

[peacetraveler22]

If time travel ever becomes possible, I would transport myself back to Moscow or the province in the 1970's or 80's to better understand the realities of life in Soviet times. Looking at old photos in books or online, I can hardly envision such a system of life where everything is so structured and predestined. This is the eternal debate amongst my older Russian friends and readers - the pros and cons of life in the USSR vs. modern day Russia. Tonight I read an article written by a man who was only nine years old when the Soviet Union collapsed. However, he claims this was long enough to form a strong enough opinion about life in the USSR to know that he never wishes to return. His observations seem a bit shallow and naive on the surface. He takes a few of the most commonly expressed strengths of the Soviet system, and explains why they are misconceptions. Please remember these are not my personal views, but the opinions of a former resident in the Soviet Union. Let's begin with education...

Myth 1: The Soviet education was the best in the world



There's a common belief that education in the Soviet system was good, perhaps even the best in the world.  However, this was largely a result of propaganda, and it's important to ask the primary question of how a "great" education should be measured?  It's clear that scientific progress in the West was no less than in the USSR.  Moreover, if everyone was so smart in the USSR, why couldn't they make good cars and VCRs? Something is wrong here, and doesn't add up.

Myth 2: Soviet medicine was better

Obviously, the quality of medical care was worse in Soviet times.  It has always been worse when compared to decaying capitalist countries. Life expectancy in the USSR was lower than the "enemy" at all times.

Reasons for lower life expectancy are simple - lack of modern medicines and treatments. While every effort was being made to create the next warheads, citizens died without having access to advanced diagnostics or care.

Myth 3: Free housing

A common misconception about the USSR is that everyone lived for free. In fact, there was no free housing but cooperatives, which cost an average sum, payable through reasonable installments for 25 years. Everyone in the USSR had a roof over their head, but the quality of housing was horrible and inferior in quality. After the collapse of the USSR, the owners of these apartments were faced with the need to privatize for big money, otherwise the housing became the property of the city. What, in general, makes housing better during Soviet times? Nothing.



Myth 4: In the Soviet Union, there was no unemployment or homeless

The main problem here was the equalization of labor in low wages, where many people lived paycheck to paycheck, creating a low standard of living for the majority. It's better to provide economic incentives for high quality work, rather than simply handing people wages. The latter creates lazy and entitled workers. Side note from me: I dont' understand employment during Soviet times? How were people hired? They picked their own jobs, or the choice was made by the government?

Myth 5: The most powerful army in the world!

Classic point of discussion for lovers of the USSR! Yes, the Union had a strong army, to the "defense industry" money was never spared. The Soviet forces were greatly feared abroad, but there are two important points. (1) A strong army has no effect on the lives of ordinary people, except in the negative direction (when all power goes to the creation of tanks, there remains no funds for infrastructure and other improvements); and (2) the Armies of Western countries were no less strong.

Myth 6: Products and clothes were better in the USSR


This is complete nonsense according to the author. In Soviet times, everything was worse with clothing and consumer choice. People wore shoes for ten years, and it was the same with all other clothes which were of poor quality. Remember how everyone was so desperate for Levis and other American jeans?

In his opinion, the absolute worst part of life in the USSR was the lack of choice in everything - education, work, food, clothing. Soviet citizens couldn't leave the country or really choose the accommodations which best fit their own personality, goals or comfort.  Individuality was suffocated. The government planned human life from birth to death. In general, it completely ruined the country and strangled motivation.

The author's final words - "God forbid that we all go back. Now we live a thousand times better." Do you agree?

P.S. - is the term "совок" offensive and derogatory, or it's okay to use?

Comments

[peacetraveler22.livejournal.com]

In your view, which was stronger? The Soviet army, or the army in modern Russia?

[moebiuscat.livejournal.com]

I'm not a military expert, but as far as I know the army was always very bad. Losses to Germans in 2nd world war were about 7 to 1 - and Russians had more tanks and people and were defending. Conscription army is badly trained, officers and generals are mostly incompetent. All this hasn't changed. Navy consists barely functioning obsolete ships that burn in docs. Nobody knows but most ICBM are probably non-functional. Equipment deteriorated in the end of 80-s and 90-s but now there were a lot of money spent on rearming. Still, I think that now the army is much worse, because the technology is still a few generations bad and there is no way they can close the gap any time soon, because science and technology is just not there. In any modern conflict with NATO power Russia would lose catastrophically: Their planes won't see F22-s and F-35s (and others) at all or see them too late, while NATO planes would launch missiles from invisibility and in any sector no need to acquire lock by aiming the plane, modern Israeli and US missiles can lock and fire even backwards). Russian advantage in close dogfights is irrelevant because of this. The air superiority would be total, and that wins wars. Most other equipment is inferior to NATO and less reliable. Special forces are good, but normal conscripts are not comparable to professional armies. I think in any non-nuclear conflict with a modern western nation Russian army would fail catastrophically. Even the best special forces could not make good progress in Ukraine against Ukrainian army that was in much worse state than Russian.

So, some say, Putin wants to fight ISIS in Syria, but I don't believe it's possible with this kind of dysfunctional army. It would be a good thing actually if he could...