←back to thread

Mikhail Gorbachev has died

(www.reuters.com)
970 points homarp | 9 comments | 30 Aug 22 20:37 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source | bottom
Show context
idlewords ◴[30 Aug 22 21:20 UTC] No.32655237[source]▶
Gorbachev secured his place in history by what he didn't do. While never endorsing the end of the eastern bloc, he made it clear beginning in the late 1980's that unlike his predecessors, he would not oppose democratic reforms in Eastern Europe by force. To general astonishment, he kept this promise, and with the regrettable exception of Lithuania this commitment to not repeating the crimes of his predecessors is Gorbachev's greatest legacy. In 1988 you would have been hard pressed to find anyone who could imagine the mostly peaceful collapse of the Eastern Bloc, but Gorbachev had the moral courage to accept this once unimaginable consequence of his policy and to see it through.
replies(5): >>32658309 #>>32659086 #>>32659566 #>>32661746 #>>32667131 #
1. hackerlight ◴[31 Aug 22 04:16 UTC] No.32658309[source]▶
From everything I've read about him, he was a true liberal and egalitarian. How does someone like that rise up the ranks of an authoritarian USSR in the first place? Did he hide his beliefs and present as just a competent bureaucrat until he got to the top?
replies(4): >>32658703 #>>32659270 #>>32659579 #>>32661417 #
2. michaelwww ◴[31 Aug 22 05:26 UTC] No.32658703[source]▶
The way I remember as a far off observer was the Soviet Union went through a few very old and ineffective leaders after Brezhnev died, while their war in Afghanistan drained resources so they couldn't possibly keep up with Reagan's Star Wars initiative. Gorbachev was a young, vital fresh face with new ideas that they had to go with to try to reform and survive.
replies(1): >>32659246 #
3. qikInNdOutReply ◴[31 Aug 22 07:02 UTC] No.32659246[source]▶
It was a gerontocracy, with old dryed husks dying on the throne pre gorbachev. It was also mostly resource exporting back then, econimically dependent on the west. The oil prices during the gulf war killed them.
replies(1): >>32661220 #
4. irusensei ◴[31 Aug 22 07:07 UTC] No.32659270[source]▶
If I remember correctly (and please correct me if I’m wrong) his ascent was influenced by his predecessor Andropov, which was one of the original revolutionaries but like Gorby he had a more liberal approach. Andropov’s health was really bad and Gorby being his right arm ended up as chairman of the union.
replies(1): >>32661176 #
5. watwut ◴[31 Aug 22 08:02 UTC] No.32659579[source]▶
He was not. He send tanks to crush protests, arresting killing and wounding people. He has his own massacre's. It is just that they did not happened in west.
6. vintermann ◴[31 Aug 22 12:21 UTC] No.32661176[source]▶
Andropov was absolutely not liberal. I don't think it was that Gorbachev was Andropov's favourite, but that the politburo realized it was a problem to keep a appointing elderly leaders in bad health. Gorbachev was "only" 54, and since he lived to 2022 I'd say they made a pretty good bet on his health, too.
7. vintermann ◴[31 Aug 22 12:28 UTC] No.32661220{3}[source]▶
We call it a gerontocracy, but all those guys were considerably younger than the current and previous US presidents, at 79 and 76 respectively.
replies(1): >>32667804 #
8. lenkite ◴[31 Aug 22 12:51 UTC] No.32661417[source]▶
No doubt the opinions of Americans here on HN will do a swift 180 once they realize Gorbachev supported the annexation of Crimea and that he condemned the growing NATO presence in eastern europe.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ukraine-crimea-gorbachev-...

9. CRConrad ◴[31 Aug 22 20:18 UTC] No.32667804{4}[source]▶
But with the Soviet healthcare regime of the time (mainly, I'd guess, smoking like fucking chimneys), their effective age was probably at least that of Drumpf and Biden.

To take a President more contemporary to Andropov and Gorbachev: Jimmy Carter is still around, at 97.