Strengthening the positions of the party and state nomenklatura.
Open lesson on the topic:
« Economy of “Developed Socialism”
teachers of the Municipal Educational Institution “Secondary School “LCO”, Vsevolozhsk District, Leningrad Region
Varava Irina Mikhailovna
Class: 9-a 02/19/2014
Subject: history
Lesson objectives:
Reveal the main results of the economic development of the USSR in 1965-1985. To bring students to an understanding of the causes of the coming economic crisis in the USSR
Develop cognitive interest in the subject through the use of information technology and digital resources.
Continue to develop the skills to work with historical documents, analyze them, and draw conclusions.
Lesson type: Problem-based
Form:lesson using a PC, I-Pad and a multimedia textbook “History of Russia. XX century” Antonova T.S., Kharitonova A.L., Danilova A.A., Kosulina L.G. M.2010.
Teaching methods:visual and illustrative, search, research.
The following competencies are formed during the lesson:
- informational,
- educational and cognitive,
- communicative,
- value-semantic.
Training equipment:PC, I-Pad, textbook, multimedia textbook (disc no. 4),
Main dates:
March 1965 - proclamation at the Plenum of the CPSU Central Committee of the reform of the agricultural sector of the economy;
September 1965 - adoption by the Plenum of the CPSU Central Committee of the main directions of industrial reform;
1979 - reform of the economic mechanism.
Terms:
*Commodity hunger
*Economic stagnation
*Scarcity economy
*Extensive development
*Intensive development
During the classes.
I. Organizational moment
Checking readiness for the lesson;
Setting goals and objectives for the lesson.
II. Check of knowledge
Using the I Pad for testing on the topic: “Conservation of the political regime” - 2 people
Individual task on I-Pad “Analysis of documents” - 1 person
At the blackboard: -List the main contradictions of the political regime of 1965-1985 -1 person (written)
Orally: Describe the main articles of the Constitution of “Developed Socialism” - 1 person
Frontally with class:
Questions:
- Why is the period 1965-1985? called the golden age of nomenklatura.
- What new features in socio-political development appeared during this period?
- What ways of economic reform were proposed in the 50-60s.
- Evaluate the agricultural reform undertaken by Khrushchev. Show its positive and negative sides. How can we explain the improvement in the second half of the 50s? and deterioration in the early 60s. supplying the population with food? What political decisions was this related to?
- What new appeared in the development of industry under Khrushchev?
- What were the contradictions and limitations of Khrushchev’s economic reforms?
III. Learning new material
- Agrarian reform of 1965 and its results
- Contents and results of economic reform in industry.
3. Scientific and technological progress.
4. The essence of the increase in stagnation in the socio-economic sphere (results of curtailing reforms).
(Teacher's story based on thematic presentation)
Goal of the reform:
1) changing the conditions of planning and strengthening economic incentives;
2) overcome the traditional disadvantages of the existing economic model:
- growth in capital investment and construction in progress;
- mass production of products that were not sold;
- the discrepancy between labor productivity growth and faster wage growth;
- increase in paper production.
Problem task. What was the Soviet economy like in 1965-1985: prosperity or stagnation? Explain your point of view.
The essence and main directions of the reform.
Working with the content of reforms according to options:
Frontal summing up of options
2 people-experts (numbers of strong students) work individually with the I Pad and additional materials from the Internet on the table:
« Objective and subjective reasons for economic stagnation in 1965-1985"
Working with computer textbook materials: CD-4.
Progress and results of reform in agriculture
While studying the video sequence of the media textbook, students are asked to write down the main directions of agrarian reform in their notebooks:
1. Solving social problems of the village.
2. Partial use of economic incentives to work:
a) increase in purchase prices,
b) establishing a firm public procurement plan for 6 years,
c) introduction of a 50% surcharge to the base price for excess sales of products,
d) increasing investment in agriculture.
3. Easing restrictions on private farming.
Checking the completion of the task.
1.What are the reasons for such low profitability of state and collective farm production with huge investments in agriculture?
2. Taking into account previous historical experience (including the Soviet period), indicate the levers that could significantly increase the profitability of agricultural production.
3. How can we explain the fact that, despite the huge, constantly increasing allocations for agricultural development, food shortages in the country grew from year to year?
4.How did the authorities try to solve the problem of food shortages?
Progress and results of reform in industry
When considering issues of industrial reform, students should pay special attention to the search for internal contradictions in the 1965 reform.
During viewing, students are asked to write down the main directions of reform:
- changing planning conditions and increasing economic incentives;
- introduction of new indicators designed to ensure its quality;
- reducing to a minimum the number of planned indicators, along with maintaining strict standards for production volume;
- permission to leave at the disposal of enterprises part of the income, which was divided into three funds: a fund for material incentives, a fund for socio-cultural and everyday development (construction of housing, clubs, boarding houses, etc.), a fund for self-financing production;
- restoration of industrial management through line ministries;
- combination of unified state planning with local initiative. The right to adjust approved plans was given to the enterprises themselves.
(Checking the completion of the task.)
Working with the diagram p. 300 of the textbook. Task: Analyze the diagram. What are the features of the country's development in 1965-1985? does it allow you to install?
Average annual growth rates of key indicators of economic development, %
Further, during a conversation with students, the main reasons for the collapse of the economic reform of 1965 are identified and the table “Objective and subjective reasons for the collapse of the economic reform of 1965” is filled out:
PRESENTATION OF EXPERT FINAL MATERIALS
After filling out the table, students answer the questions: what are the reasons for the decline in the country's economic growth rate? Which ones do you consider the main ones? Why?
Scientific and technical progress.
What stage of development did the West enter in the early 70s?
Describe post-industrial society.
What is the position of the XXIV Congress of the CPSU on NTP.
How did the achievements of scientific and technical progress combine with the advantages of socialism?
Point out the positive trends at this time.
What shortcomings did the USSR have in the 70-80s?
Why did the situation worsen by the 80s? Make an evaluative conclusion.
Social Policy Analysis.
After watching the video sequence of the media textbook, students are asked to answer the questions:
Prove that the life of Soviet people in the 70s relatively improved.
What are the reasons for life improvement?
How and why did the situation change by the 80s?
How could they maintain the image of a great power?
IV. Consolidation.
Conducted based on the materials of the test control of the media textbook
Completing a problematic task.
V. Homework: § 44.
VI. Summing up the lesson.
Plan: Agrarian reform of 1965 and its results Contents and results of economic reform in industry. 3. Scientific and technological progress. 4. The essence of the increase in stagnation in the socio-economic sphere (results of curtailing reforms).
Basic concepts: Product famine Economic stagnation Deficit economy Extensive development Intensive development
L. I. Brezhnev A. N. Kosygin Leaders of reforms
Key dates: March 1965 - agrarian reform September 1965 - industrial reform 1979 - reform of the economic mechanism
Results of the winding down of reforms Based on the analysis of the diagrams, determine the results of winding down the reforms in 1965. National income Industrial production Agricultural production Labor productivity Real income per capita %
Results of rolling back reforms %
Lesson conclusion: The period of the 70s - the first half of the 80s - socio-economic stagnation in the country, characterized by: Development of the economy along an extensive path Strengthening centralized management Return to quantitative indicators rather than qualitative ones
Homework: § 44 + EXTRA NOTEBOOK. TASKS: Make a presentation
The Brezhnev era and Leonid Ilyich himself evoke predominantly good memories among the vast majority of older and middle-aged Russians. 61% of respondents consider the years of Brezhnev’s rule to be a prosperous time for the country, and only 17% as an unfavorable one. Moreover, among those aged 36 to 54 years old, 75% of respondents give a positive assessment of the Brezhnev era, among those older than 74% (negative, respectively, 14% and 18%). Young Russians (under 35 years of age) are much less likely to assess the times of Brezhnev, but they also more often recognize them as prosperous than as disadvantaged (35% and 20%, respectively).
1. Conservation of the political regime. 2. Problems of the economy of “developed socialism”. 3. Features of social policy. 4. Contradictions in public life. 1. Conservation of the political regime. 2. Problems of the economy of “developed socialism”. 3. Features of social policy. 4. Contradictions in public life.
Do you agree with the statement that during the reign of L. Brezhnev, “stagnation” was observed in all sectors of society? L.I. Brezhnev (g.) Is the era of Brezhnev “developed socialism” or “a time of stagnation”?
70 years 40 billion rubles. annually Nomenclature (lat. nomenclatura - list of names, list, list) - the highest "title=" Growth in the number of ministries and departments The number of administrative staff (1983) - 18 million people (by 6-7 people - 1 manager) Average age - > 70 years 40 billion rubles annually Nomenclature (Latin nomenclatura - list of names, list, list) - highest" class="link_thumb"> 10 !} Growth in the number of ministries and departments The number of administrative staff (1983) – 18 million people. (for 6-7 people – 1 manager) Average age - > 70 years 40 billion rubles. annually Nomenklatura (lat. nomenclatura - list of names, list, list) - the highest layer of party, economic and military leadership in the USSR. 70 years 40 billion rubles. annually Nomenclature (Latin nomenclatura - list of names, list, list) - the highest "> 70 years 40 billion rubles annually Nomenclature (Latin nomenclatura - list of names, list, list) - the highest layer of party, economic and military leadership in the USSR "> 70 years 40 billion rubles. annually Nomenclature (lat. nomenclatura - list of names, list, list) - the highest "title=" Growth in the number of ministries and departments The number of administrative staff (1983) - 18 million people (by 6-7 people - 1 manager) Average age - > 70 years 40 billion rubles annually Nomenclature (Latin nomenclatura - list of names, list, list) - highest"> title="Growth in the number of ministries and departments The number of administrative staff (1983) – 18 million people. (for 6-7 people – 1 manager) Average age - > 70 years 40 billion rubles. annually Nomenclature (lat. nomenclatura - list of names, list, list) - highest"> !}
PROBLEMS IN THE ECONOMY Constant annual decline in economic growth rates. Lagging behind developed Western countries in scientific and technological progress. Priority of extensive forms of economic development. The inefficiency of the socialist economic system. The dominance of the command-administrative system. Lack of real economic incentives for the population to work.
The gap between official ideology and real life led to the population no longer trusting the authorities. In 1982, the new head of the party and state, Yu. V. Andropov, put forward the idea of “improving developed socialism” and announced that this would be a very long historical period.
Intensification of the ideological struggle. Ideological control over the media and cultural institutions has increased. Emigration of cultural figures abroad. A specific feature of the culture of the 6070s. there was the so-called “tape revolution”. Movements of dissidents (human rights activists). Deepening contradictions between government and society.
1. In March 1965 the reform was announced:
1) education 4) pension system
2) healthcare 5) tax system
3) in agriculture
2. Among the measures aimed at boosting agriculture in the 2nd half of the 60s were:
1) purchase prices for agricultural products have been increased
2) firm (for 6 years) plans for government grain purchases
3) investment in the industry has been increased
4) a 50% premium has been established for the delivery of above-plan products
5) all of the above are true
3. Reforming agriculture, the Brezhnev leadership placed the main emphasis on:
1) increasing the role of the Ministry of Agriculture, increasing capital investments and writing off debts
2) ill-conceived reclamation
3) chemicalization of the soil
4) production of expensive equipment
5) construction of giant livestock complexes
4. For 1966-1980 Almost 400 billion rubles were allocated for the development of agriculture, which were spent, among other things, on:
1) construction of giant livestock complexes
2) expensive equipment
3) ill-conceived reclamation and chemicalization of soil
4) all of the above are true
5) 1 and 2 are true
5. The introduction of stable cash salaries on collective farms was an important social achievement, but it turned out to be:
1) increased drunkenness
2) growth of dependent sentiments
3) increasing shortage of goods in rural areas
4) significant depreciation of money
5) sharply increased outflow of population from the village
6. As the line to develop interest in the results of labor in agriculture was winding down by the beginning of the 80s:
1) collective farms and state farms in general turned out to be unprofitable
2) developed arable land for 1964-1968. decreased by 22 million hectares
3) losses of agricultural products ranged from 20% to 40% of the harvest
4) the country with the richest black soils turned out to be the largest importer of grain and food products
5) everything stated is correct
7. In the industrial reform announced in September 1965, its main provisions were:
1) changes in planning conditions
2) economic incentives
3) banking regulators (loans, securities, etc.)
4) 1 and 2 are true
5) 1, 2 and 3 are correct
8. The 1965 industrial reform allowed part of the profits to remain at the disposal of enterprises for the fund:
1) material incentives
2) fund for social, cultural and everyday development (housing, clubs, boarding houses)
3) self-financing of production
4) 1 and 2 are true
5) 1, 2 and 3 are true
9. Industry management through line ministries (instead of economic councils) was restored in... the year:
1) 1964 2) 1965 3) 1966 4) 1967 5) 1970
10. During the years of the 8th Five-Year Plan (1966-1970), about... large enterprises were built in the country:
1) 1600 2) 1700 3) 1800 4) 1900 5) 2000
11. Despite all its limitations, the 1965 reform in the industrial sector yielded considerable economic results, because already during the 8th Five-Year Plan (1966-1970) the volume of industrial production increased:
1) one and a half times 4) two times
2) by 30% 5) by a quarter
12. By the end of the 60s. industrial reform declined mainly due to
1) Czechoslovak events of 1968
2) a directive model of the economy, which has exhausted its resource
3) a significant increase in military spending
4) a sharp rise in the cost of mining
5) physical wear and tear and obsolescence of equipment
13. The country's leadership made another attempt (after 1965) to revive the directive economy in... the year:
1) 1977 2) 1978 3) 1979 4) 1980 5) 1982
14. The official justification for the reduction in the effectiveness of the directive economy for the Brezhnev leadership was such objective reasons as:
1) worsening demographic situation
2) increase in the cost of mining
3) physical wear and tear and obsolescence of equipment
4) increase in defense spending
5) all specified
15. In 1983 Yu.V. Andropov undertook an economic experiment to weaken central planning, which:
1) did not give any results
2) brought short-term success
3) brought short-term success, but went almost unnoticed
4) went almost unnoticed and was curtailed due to Andropov’s illness
5) was curtailed due to Andropov’s illness, almost without starting
16. The party's goal of “combining the achievements of scientific and technical progress with the advantages of socialism” was voiced at:
1) XXIV Congress of the CPSU 4) XXVII Congress of the CPSU
3) XXVI Congress of the CPSU Plenum of the CPSU Central Committee
17. The country's leadership in the 70-80s realized the need to transition to intensive methods in the economy, which was expressed in:
1) fourfold reduction in the number of enterprises being built
2) development of robotics and microelectronics
3) expanding nuclear engineering
4) all of the above are true
5) 2 and 3 are true
18. By the beginning of the 80s. 40% of industrial workers and 60% of construction workers worked manually, and 10% in agriculture.
Agrarian reform of 1965 and its results.
Difficulties in the development of the country's economy in the early 60s. even among political leaders they raised doubts about the effectiveness of administrative dictatorship. Even under Khrushchev, another economic discussion began on the pages of the press, at the center of which were the problems of economic stimulation of production. In the course of these debates, the basic outlines of the future economic reform. In general, it did not reject the directive model of the economy, but introduced into it some mechanisms of internal self-regulation and the producer’s material interest in the results of labor.
In March 1965, agricultural reform was announced. Measures were outlined to solve the social problems of the village, to partially use economic incentives for work (purchase prices were increased, a firm government procurement plan was established for 6 years, a 50% premium was introduced to the base price for above-plan sales of products, and capital investments were increased). “Repressive” measures for running private farms were also weakened. All this led to revival farms .
However, the authorities continued to place the main emphasis on increasing the role of the Ministry of Agriculture in the planning and management of the agricultural sector, as well as increasing capital investment and writing off the debts of collective farms.
Large funds allocated for the development of agriculture were used extremely ineffectively. Part of them was spent on the construction of giant complexes, the purchase of expensive equipment, ill-conceived reclamation and chemicalization of lands. The introduction of stable cash salaries on collective farms (but essentially an important social achievement of that time) resulted in an increase in dependency sentiment.
As the line on the development of interest in the results of labor was winding down, by the beginning of the 80s. Collective and state farms in general turned out to be unprofitable.
As a result, over 25 years (1964 - 1988), the developed arable land decreased by 22 million hectares. Losses of agricultural products ranged from 20 to 40% of the harvest. The country turned out to be the largest importer grains and food products.
Reforms in industry: plans and results.
In September 1965, the party leadership announced industrial reform. It did not encroach on the foundations of directive economics, but became the most radical reform in all the years of Soviet power. Its main provisions were changes in planning conditions and increased economic incentives. The number of planned indicators was reduced to a minimum. Along with maintaining strict standards for production volume, new indicators were introduced that were supposed to ensure its quality.
To economically stimulate producers, it was allowed to leave at the disposal of enterprises part of income, which was divided into three funds: a fund for material incentives, a fund for social, cultural and everyday development (construction of housing, clubs, boarding houses, etc.), and a fund for self-financing production.
Instead of economic councils, industry management was restored through line ministries, and it was noted that these would not be the previous ministries - “dictators”, but new ones - partners and consultants on organizing production in conditions of self-financing (based on the development of self-government, self-sufficiency, self-financing). A combination of unified state planning with local initiative was also planned. Moreover, the right to adjust the approved plans was granted only to the enterprises .
The expansion of the rights of ministries was in clear contradiction with the thesis of the reform on the “independence” of enterprises.
The reform produced significant economic results. During the years of the Eighth Five-Year Plan (1966 - 1970), the volume of industrial production increased by one and a half times. About 1,900 large enterprises were built (including the Volzhsky Automobile Plant in Togliatti, etc.).
However, by the end of the 60s. the reform, despite the fact that no one canceled it, began to decline. At the same time, the planned indicators also crept down: the average annual growth rate of national income from 7.7% during the Eighth Five-Year Plan fell to 3.5% during the Eleventh (1981 - 1985), the growth rate of labor productivity during the same time decreased from 6 .8 to 3%.
All this was explained by objective reasons: an unfavorable demographic situation and a decrease in the proportion of the working-age population, the depletion of the traditional raw material base and a sharp rise in the cost of mining, physical wear and tear and obsolescence of equipment, a significant increase in military spending, etc.
However, the main circumstance was that the existing conditions for organizing and managing production could no longer provide solutions to the problems facing the economy.
In 1979, the government made another attempt to revive the country's economy by improving the economic mechanism and increasing the role of the party leadership. However, these efforts failed to sharply accelerate economic development. At the same time, they again started talking about the need to prioritize moral incentives for work over material ones. A new round of socialist competition has begun, and the shortcomings of the economic mechanism have been properly compensated.
In 1983, after the death of L. I. Brezhnev, the new leader of the country, Yu. V. Andropov, undertook a “large-scale economic experiment,” which involved weakening centralized planning and distribution, and some changes in pricing at the level of individual enterprises and regions. These measures brought short-term success, but went almost unnoticed against the backdrop of the changes that were gaining momentum.
Changing the economic mechanism remained a vital problem.
Scientific and technical progress.
In the early 70s. The West has entered the stage of post-industrial development. This meant not only the automation of production, the widespread use of robots and computers, the introduction of high-tech technologies, but also the individualization of the labor process, turning it into free creative activity. In the public life of Western countries, these changes caused the democratization of all its aspects.
In the USSR they also started talking about scientific and technological progress (or rather, they continued to talk). At the XXIV Congress of the CPSU there was even a directive to “combine the achievements of scientific and technical progress with the advantages of socialism.” However, new major discoveries and developments, if they did not have military significance, most often failed to be implemented. This was either due to a “lack of funds” or due to the lack of strong support among developers in those authorities where the fate of discoveries was decided.
Of course, the country's leaders began to realize the need to transition to intensive production methods (the number of large enterprises built annually was reduced by four times, scientific and production associations were created, new industries emerged to meet the needs of the time: robotics, microelectronics, nuclear engineering, etc.). However, these trends did not become decisive for economic development.
Despite the first-class and sometimes unique developments of Soviet scientists in fundamental science, in practical life the progress of science and technology was largely not felt even by the beginning of the 80s. 40% of industrial workers, up to 60% of construction workers, and up to 75% of agricultural workers worked manually
By 1985, when there were 1.5 million new computers and 17 million personal computers in operation in the USA, the USSR had no more than several tens of thousands of similar machines, mostly outdated models.
The situation worsened due to Western sanctions against the USSR in the early 80s. , when access to the country of the best foreign models of equipment and high-tech technologies virtually ceased.
As a result, by the mid-80s. The USSR again, like the 20s, faced the threat of a new lag behind Western countries
Social politics.
The social sphere was financed exclusively but on a residual basis. For example, the share of capital investment in housing construction (to the total volume) decreased from 17.7% in 1966 - 1970 and to 15.1% in 1981 - 1985. As a result, in the early 80s, the housing problem in the USSR worsened again (in 1984, only 2 million apartments were built - the same number as were built in the early 60s, although the country's population increased noticeably)
Government spending on health care was significantly cut. The result was immediate. If in the early 60s. The USSR had the lowest mortality rate in the world, and in terms of life expectancy we were among the most prosperous countries, then by the beginning of the 80s. The USSR was already in 35th place in the world in terms of life expectancy and 2nd, 1st 50th in terms of infant mortality rate
Population growth and a decline in the rate of agricultural production again led to an exacerbation of the food problem. In the early 80s. The USSR lagged behind advanced countries not only in nutritional structure, but also in the consumption of traditional foods. At the same time, import supplies of food increased sharply (for 1970 - 1987, purchases of meat and meat products increased by 5.2 times, fish and fish products - by 12.4, vegetable oil - by 12.8, grain - by 13.8, animal oil - 183.2 times) The main source of funds for these purchases was oil exports
Already in the 70s. in some areas, a card system for the distribution of products began to be introduced. The increase in real income per capita from 5.9% in 1966 - 1970. fell to 2.1% in 1981 - 1985. But still, in general, the situation of the bulk of the population has improved. Fewer and fewer people continued to live in communal apartments. Everyday life included refrigerators, televisions, and washing machines. Wages also increased. Nevertheless, the share of the wage fund in the national income created in the industry of the USSR was only 36.5% (1985), while in the USA it was 64%, and in some other countries - up to 80%.
By this time, the USSR occupied only 77th place in the world in terms of per capita consumption.
All this indicated that it was becoming possible to maintain the status of a great power only through a relative increase in the exploitation of workers, a reduction in social programs, merciless exploitation of the natural environment.
Questions and tasks:
1. Why did the economic reform of 1965 not produce the expected results?
2. What was the main bet on in economic development by the Brezhnev leadership in the 70s?
3. What do you see as the reasons for the relative improvement in the lives of Soviet people in the 70s?
4. Name the reasons for the increasing gap between the USSR economy and the economy of Western countries in the 70s - early 80s.
History of Russia, XX - early XXI centuries: Textbook. for 9th grade. general education institutions / A. A. Danilov, L. G. Kosulina, A. V. Pyzhikov. - 10th ed. - M.: Education, 2003
Questions and tasks: Get acquainted with the memoirs of the poet S.V. Mikhalkov about L.I. Brezhnev (see assignment No. 2, p. 220) and prepare answers to the questions for the document. How do you see L.I. Brezhnev as leader of the USSR? To what extent does the personality of L.I. Brezhnev as the head of state influenced the state of the country during this period? Explain the meaning of the concept “nomenclature”. Compare the position of the party-state bureaucracy of the Brezhnev and Stalin periods of Soviet history (§18-19, p. 132). How was the power of the Soviet party-state nomenklatura manifested in the 1960s and 70s? Analyze a fragment of the document. Do you think the essence of power of the Soviet totalitarian regime changed in the early 1970s? 1980s? If so, how was this manifested? (It is advisable to draw the attention of high school students to the consolidation of the power of the party-state bureaucracy in Article 6 of the 1977 USSR Constitution. The teacher invites schoolchildren to compare the content)