I would disagree, although they started off on a negative path, I would say that there have been economies that began similarly, but were able to improve with good governance, leadership etc. For example, Singapore originally began as a 3rd world country, but under the leadership of Lee Kuan Yew, Singapore made steady progress and is now a 1st world country. The leadership of the Soviet Union had potential to succeed, the circumstances where they suffered under shortages of consumer goods, lack of innovation and failure to adapt, could have been changed in the short time frame. Again, Singapore as an example also lacked natural resources to sell, but were able to adapt. The main reason Soviet economy failed was their lack of adaptability, which was generally due to their lack of proper leadership towards progression.

P: Firstly, I think that the soviet economy was doomed to fail from the start due to external burdens on its economy.

E: Since the start of the Cold War, USSR has been actively fighting proxy wars against the US, draining its resources such as weapons and manpower. It also supported its allies such as the Arab states in the Middle East and Fidel Castro’s Cuba, by providing money, technical equipment, advisors, food and medical supplies.

E: All these were substantial financial burdens, which increased greatly when the war in Afghanistan broke out in 1979. During the war, soviet troops entered Afghanistan to maintain the power of the pro-soviet govt there, but were tied down for the next 10 years by the Afghan fighters, who saw themselves as fighting against the communist regime. They were strong in how they knew the territory, had plenty in experience in guerilla warfare & were supplied by weapons and money by US and Saudi Arabia. As the supplies such as nuclear weapons in Afghanistan were very expensive, the USSR invested far too much in its military power (estimated 30 to 50% of soviet resources went to military). This exhausted the USSR’s resources, putting a huge burden on their economy and rebuilding of their country.

L: As such, this led to the gradual weakening of USSR and thus I feel that USSR was doomed to fail from the start.

I agree with the statement to a large extent. (Point) The Soviet Economy was due to fail from the start due to the various problems it faced internally. The Soviet Union was unable to control and resolve its own internal issues and struggles, and thus could not assist any other communist regimes under its power. (Example) As a result, the credibility and reliability of the Soviet Union declined, leading to many Eastern European countries borrowing large sums of money from Western banks. Thus, the general public faced economic issues and rising costs of living. (Explanation) Furthermore, the Soviet Union was frequently engaged with the political issues and crises of foreign countries, (Example) which drained its economic resources, as the USSR was responsible for suppling weapons and supplies to their communist allies, such as those in Afghanistan. (Explanation) Hence, I believe that the Soviet Economy was doomed to fail from the start, due to the inability to handle internal conflicts, as well as their irresponsible financial decisions. (Link)

I agree with the statement as the Soviet Union had structural weaknesses of the Command Economy. In the 1970s, the Soviet economy expanded and became overwhelmed by the increasing demands. The government was unable to keep up the many companies making different goods, acting too slowly and making too many poor decisions. For example, the USSR was very slow to bring new technology into its industries. This meant that the Soviet government was very lacking and their decision to call war upon the US because of the tensions between them was not well thought out. Hence, I agree that the Soviet Economy was doomed to fail from the start.

I agree that the Soviet Economy was doomed to fail from the start.

(P) Firstly due to the Soviet’s command economy. (E) The soviet economy began to stagnate from the early 1970s due to the inherent flaws for the Soviet command economy, in comparison to the free market economy that the USA and Western European countries embraced. This main difference resided in how resource allocation was decided. This in turn influenced the growth of the economies of both superpowers, resulting in the Soviet economy underperforming. (E) For example, while the USA’s economy suffered a downturn in the 1970s, the Soviet Union was also affected by low morale among its workers, poor efficiency in its agricultural sector, rising fuel costs and inferior quality of its exports. The inefficiency of the Soviet political and economic system only exacerbated these problems as well as undermined the claim of the communists to be adequately caring for all its citizens and fuelled further dissent against the Soviet government. (L) Thus this shows that the Soviet economy was doomed to fail from the start due to the weaknesses of their command economy.

The Soviet Economy was doomed to fail from the start. As the Soviet Union used power to control the Eastern block of Europe, the countries would have felt oppressed. As the countries were forced to make an agreement to just trade within the Eastern block and Soviet Union, the economy would have been very limited. The countries would be very frustrated with the bad economy, so they would not want to continue engaging with the Soviet Union and their communism. Thus as everyone was disappointed with their community compared to the thriving economies in the West, the Soviet Union’s economy would have always been doomed.

P: we agree that the soviet economy was doomed to fail from the start because of the ageing leadership.

Evi: the average age of the Russian politburo was 65. This when paired with the short political terms causes instability. Exp: The old age of the politicians also give them a false sense of knowledge because they refuse to adapt to the times. Since all the politicians are from a similar time period, they have similar opinions. This leads to groupthink where their political activities are relatively stagnant because of the lack of critical thinking.

L: therefore we believe that the soviet economy was doomed to fail because of political instability due to ageing leadership

(E) The Soviet economy became overwhelmed by the increasing demands as it continued to grow and thus grew too slow and poor at making a decisions. In the 1970s, the Soviets provided money, technical equipment, advisors, food and medical supplies to many of its allies, such as the Arab states, to fight proxy wars.

(E) This can be seen in Soviet war effort towards the Afghanistan war in 1979.

(L) Thus, the USSR had invested too much into its military power, adding on to its existing financial burdens by doing so. Therefore, the USSR’s rapid depletion of its own resources to fight such wars resulted in the fall of the Soviet economy.

(P) I agree with the view as the Soviet Economy was too heavily focused on their involved in other wars.

(E)The USSR fought proxy wars such as in Korea and Vietnam. It also supported its allies, the Arab states in the Middle East and Fidel Castro’s Cuba. Furthermore the Sovietsprovided money,technical equipment, advisors, food and medical supplies to many of their allies. All these were substantial financial burdens, which increased greatly when the war in Afghanistan broke out in 1979. The Mujahideen were fierce fighters against the USSR as they saw themselves to be fighting against the communist regime. They were well equipped by Saudi Arabia and the USA, hence they were strong opponents.

(E)Thus, the USSR put in large investments in the military power, and nuclear weapons in order to aid the uSSR in the Afghan war and proxy wars for more than 10years.

This stretched their resources, and it is estimated that30-50 per cent of Soviet resources went to the military.

(L) Hence, the Soviets heavy investment to the different wars left not enough resources for the country to solve other economic issues (poor standard of living, disillusionment of workforce)which then results in the precedented downfall of Soviet economy

The state controlled all production through Gosplan. It prioritized heavy industry and military goods, often ignoring consumer needs. This led to shortages of basic items like clothes and food. Factories made too many of the wrong things and wasted resources. This caused inefficiency and low living standards. At the same time, Soviet farms were far less productive than Western ones. Farming was inefficient due to central control, lack of incentives, and poor planning. Resulting in farmers having no reason to work harder or better, causing recurring food shortages.

There was also stagnation due to the constant changing of leadership and the Politburo being made up of many older men, resulting in groupthink. This resulted in the inability to resolve the economic issues and they were unable to deal with a reinvigorated and rejuvenated American Leadership.

These factors, central planning, failing agriculture, and excessive military focus, created a system that could not adapt or meet citizens’ basic needs. While the USSR grew quickly at first, these structural weaknesses meant it was “doomed” in the long run without major reforms.

Therefore, I strongly agree that the Soviet economy was set up for failure. The Soviet system had serious design flaws; products were wasted or misallocated, farms failed, and the economy was unbalanced. By the 1970s, without big changes, collapse was highly likely.

(Point) I agree to a certain extent that the Soviet economy was doomed to fall from the start due to the dire financial issues present in the Soviet Economy. There was an immense financial burden imposed onto the USSR’s economy which stemmed from the proxy wars fought by the USSR.

(Example) For example, The Soviet-Afghan War in 1979 had caused the USSR to exhaust a large amount of their resources. Soviets provided money, technical equipment,advisors, food and medical supplies to many of their allies. Eventually, the Soviet troops were tied down for the next 10 years by Afghan fighters which ere the Mujahideen.

(Explanation) This portrayed a major loss for the USSR in terms of manpower and resources. As a result, the USSR was also on the losing end in terms of world standing compared to the US who was financially well off as they did not exhaust their economy on other external burdens.

(Link) Therefore, the uSSR was doomed to fall from the start

Yes I agree with this statement to a large extent. 

The Politburo was filled with old ministers, and the average age was 65, while the USA’s leaders were relatively younger. This made the Soviet leaders may not have as many successors to lead the country. Many of the Soviet leaders also fell sick. For example, Brezhnev lasted till his death in 1982 and his successor Yuri Andropov lasted from 1982 to early 1894. Therefore the government was not stable as majority of the leaders did not have the health to deal with the problems and they needed to keep switching leaders on a short term.

The country was too controlled by the tight rules of communism, and the lack of economic planning caused the economy’s downfall. They invested all their money into the military and the cold war, and not the people. For example, The Soviets fought proxy wars such as in Korean and Vietnam, providing money, support, food, military weapons and medical supplies to their allies. There were little incentives for their own people, which led to stagnation. For example, There was no financial or economy plan and they exhausted their resources, which eventually made their economy have problems. 

Therefore the USSR was doomed to fall from the start.