No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Washington, 1998. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves [222]-239).

One of the great superpowers in recent history experienced a tumultuous final decade, shining a light on several important policies of economic reform known as perestroika, championed by General Secretary of the USSR Mikhail Sergeyevich Gorbachev. According to, for instance, Stuart and Gregory, the reforms aimed at renewing making the Soviet economy more efficient. In this essay, the impact of the reform on the economy is subject of analysis.The subject is approached the topic via literature research on the topic of 1980s USSR economic problems, combined with key aggregate data on economic conditions (i.e. grain yield production, GDP per capita pre- and post-perestroika, foreign trade, life expectant pre-and post-perestroika). The thesis concluded that perestroika was unable to salvage the USSR, in fact, conditions only worsened after its administration, following into the 1990s.

O presente trabalho se propõe a refletir acerca da trajetória do pensamento político e econômico de Mikhail Gorbachev durante os anos em que esteve à frente do Partido Comunista da URSS e conduziu as reformas iniciadas em 1985. Não se trata, portando, de um estudo minucioso da perestroika, nem de um trabalho biográfico sobre o último líder máximo soviético. Nosso enfoque se volta para as rupturas e continuidades no entendimento do secretário-geral quanto às políticas adotadas e à própria natureza do regime. O exame crítico pormenorizado das diversas intervenções e publicações de Gorbachev nos permite demonstrar como transitam na sua visão conceitos chaves como a introdução de elementos de mercado na economia, a burocracia partidária e a democratização da sociedade e do sistema político da URSS. Torna-se possível ainda compreender o caminho percorrido na visão do líder quanto à própria ideia de socialismo, que caminha da filiação aos pilares ideológicos oficiais para uma vertente cada vez mais próxima da socialdemocracia, bem como a natureza do regime que conduzia, que ao final seria caracterizado por ele como totalitário. / This paper aims to reflect on the path of political and economic thought of Mikhail Gorbachev during the years he was ahead of the USSR Communist Party and led the reforms initiated in 1985. It is not, in this sense, a detailed study of perestroika or a biographical work on the last Soviet leader. Our focus turns to the ruptures and continuities in understanding the Secretary-General as to the adopted policies and the very nature of the regime. The detailed critical examination of the various interventions and Gorbachev publications allows us to demonstrate how key concepts transiting in his vision as the introduction of market elements in the economy, the party bureaucracy and the democratization of society and the political system of the USSR. It is also possible to understand the path taken in the leader\'s vision about the very idea of socialism, which walks of membership in the official ideological pillars to a shed ever closer to social democracy, and the nature of the regime he led, that in the end he characterized as totalitarian.

O presente trabalho se propõe a refletir acerca da trajetória do pensamento político e econômico de Mikhail Gorbachev durante os anos em que esteve à frente do Partido Comunista da URSS e conduziu as reformas iniciadas em 1985. Não se trata, portando, de um estudo minucioso da perestroika, nem de um trabalho biográfico sobre o último líder máximo soviético. Nosso enfoque se volta para as rupturas e continuidades no entendimento do secretário-geral quanto às políticas adotadas e à própria natureza do regime. O exame crítico pormenorizado das diversas intervenções e publicações de Gorbachev nos permite demonstrar como transitam na sua visão conceitos chaves como a introdução de elementos de mercado na economia, a burocracia partidária e a democratização da sociedade e do sistema político da URSS. Torna-se possível ainda compreender o caminho percorrido na visão do líder quanto à própria ideia de socialismo, que caminha da filiação aos pilares ideológicos oficiais para uma vertente cada vez mais próxima da socialdemocracia, bem como a natureza do regime que conduzia, que ao final seria caracterizado por ele como totalitário. / This paper aims to reflect on the path of political and economic thought of Mikhail Gorbachev during the years he was ahead of the USSR Communist Party and led the reforms initiated in 1985. It is not, in this sense, a detailed study of perestroika or a biographical work on the last Soviet leader. Our focus turns to the ruptures and continuities in understanding the Secretary-General as to the adopted policies and the very nature of the regime. The detailed critical examination of the various interventions and Gorbachev publications allows us to demonstrate how key concepts transiting in his vision as the introduction of market elements in the economy, the party bureaucracy and the democratization of society and the political system of the USSR. It is also possible to understand the path taken in the leader\'s vision about the very idea of socialism, which walks of membership in the official ideological pillars to a shed ever closer to social democracy, and the nature of the regime he led, that in the end he characterized as totalitarian.

This thesis examines the historical progression of social and political transitions in late Soviet and post-Soviet Russia, seeking to establish the development of Putinism in an historical context and assert a definition of Putinism as a governing philosophy which exploits the rhetoric of democracy and civil society to conceal authoritarian practices. Analysis begins with Mikhail Gorbachev’s ‘moral position’ as the basis of the Gorbachev reforms and the conceptual introduction of democratic and market mechanics, followed by the rejection of the Soviet system and the mixed legacy of shock therapy under Boris Yeltsin, culminating in the ultimate ascendancy of Vladimir Putin as a response to the perceived loss of national status and social dislocation resulting from the Gorbachev and Yeltsin eras. Ultimately, it is asserted that Putinism is ideologically grounded in Chekism, fundamentally anti-democratic and inherently kleptocratic, seeking to maintain power and perpetuate a sistema centered on the Kremlin. Through vertical centralization of the state, the development of alternative mechanisms of governance, domination of political discourse, development of a personality cult, state sponsored redefinition of Russian identity and the encouragement of exceptionalist and neo-imperialist policies.

The purpose of this research is to shed light on the formation of historical myths in Post-Soviet secondary school history classrooms from 1991 to 2010. Specifically, this thesis provides insight into how Russian high school teachers and textbook authors shaped historical interpretations of the perestroika era under the leadership of Mikhail S. Gorbachev and the dissolution of the Soviet Union. This case study of the teaching of the historical time period of 1985 to 1991 illuminates the ways in which Russians reinterpreted the final years of communist rule, as well as the dominant factors influencing those assessments, including memory and the state. The historical narratives taught in post-Soviet Russian classrooms, serve as an indicator of the evolution of democratic processes, national identity and historical consciousness in Russia.<p> In addition to a survey of secondary source literature, my methodology includes the evaluation of interviews and surveys I conducted in 2009 and 2010 from over thirty secondary school history teachers in six Russian localities (in the Novosibirsk region, Moscow and St. Petersburg). I also assess the chapter contents of 15 widely-used high school history textbooks from the period of 1988 to 2009.<p> In the newly democratic Russian state, the government (including the Ministry of Education) played a central role in the reform agenda of schools. During these formative decades, the process took a revolutionary pattern, with a radical, more liberal, stage of reform occurring in the early 1990s and a more conservative, traditional retreat taking place from the mid-1990s onwards. In response to societys widespread discontent over the changes which took place in Russian schools in the 1990s, President Vladimir V. Putin took a more active role in education reform than his predecessor, Boris N. Yeltsin, especially in the realm of history education. Putins more centralized approach resulted in stricter controls on curriculum and textbook publication. Accordingly, history education was employed as a tool of the state to shape patriotic citizens through the restricting of various historical interpretations.<p> Gorbachev as leader, perestroika and the end of the Soviet Union are controversial historical topics in Russia due to the social and economic upheaval that took place during and after these years. Textbook analysis of this period often reflected dominant political discourses in Russia. In the 1990s the interpretations were quite varied as Russians were unsure of how to assess such recent history. In the 2000s the textbook interpretations became more streamlined, and Gorbachev became a scapegoat for many subsequent state problems. In contrast, history teachers opinions about the Gorbachev era did not appear to change as markedly. Many factors weigh in on an individuals interpretation of this historical period, but memory plays an especially prominent role in the teaching of the topic. Nevertheless, history teachers and textbook authors, reflecting Russian society at large, used historical myths in the teaching of the Gorbachev era, and this thesis documents these myths and sheds light on which were most prevalent and which lost favour.

The purpose of this research is to shed light on the formation of historical myths in Post-Soviet secondary school history classrooms from 1991 to 2010. Specifically, this thesis provides insight into how Russian high school teachers and textbook authors shaped historical interpretations of the perestroika era under the leadership of Mikhail S. Gorbachev and the dissolution of the Soviet Union. This case study of the teaching of the historical time period of 1985 to 1991 illuminates the ways in which Russians reinterpreted the final years of communist rule, as well as the dominant factors influencing those assessments, including memory and the state. The historical narratives taught in post-Soviet Russian classrooms, serve as an indicator of the evolution of democratic processes, national identity and historical consciousness in Russia.<p> In addition to a survey of secondary source literature, my methodology includes the evaluation of interviews and surveys I conducted in 2009 and 2010 from over thirty secondary school history teachers in six Russian localities (in the Novosibirsk region, Moscow and St. Petersburg). I also assess the chapter contents of 15 widely-used high school history textbooks from the period of 1988 to 2009.<p> In the newly democratic Russian state, the government (including the Ministry of Education) played a central role in the reform agenda of schools. During these formative decades, the process took a revolutionary pattern, with a radical, more liberal, stage of reform occurring in the early 1990s and a more conservative, traditional retreat taking place from the mid-1990s onwards. In response to societys widespread discontent over the changes which took place in Russian schools in the 1990s, President Vladimir V. Putin took a more active role in education reform than his predecessor, Boris N. Yeltsin, especially in the realm of history education. Putins more centralized approach resulted in stricter controls on curriculum and textbook publication. Accordingly, history education was employed as a tool of the state to shape patriotic citizens through the restricting of various historical interpretations.<p> Gorbachev as leader, perestroika and the end of the Soviet Union are controversial historical topics in Russia due to the social and economic upheaval that took place during and after these years. Textbook analysis of this period often reflected dominant political discourses in Russia. In the 1990s the interpretations were quite varied as Russians were unsure of how to assess such recent history. In the 2000s the textbook interpretations became more streamlined, and Gorbachev became a scapegoat for many subsequent state problems. In contrast, history teachers opinions about the Gorbachev era did not appear to change as markedly. Many factors weigh in on an individuals interpretation of this historical period, but memory plays an especially prominent role in the teaching of the topic. Nevertheless, history teachers and textbook authors, reflecting Russian society at large, used historical myths in the teaching of the Gorbachev era, and this thesis documents these myths and sheds light on which were most prevalent and which lost favour.