Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://eadnurt.diit.edu.ua/jspui/handle/123456789/10050
Title: Однопартійність чи антіпартійність: до характеристики політичної системи СРСР
Other Titles: Однопартийность или антипартийнисть: к характеристике политической системы СССР
Mono-Party or Anti-Party Principle: about the Character of the Soviet Political System
Authors: Кривчик, Геннадій Георгійович
Keywords: СРСР
більшовик
Генеральний секретар
ВКП(б)
КПРС
номенклатура
СССР
большевик
Генеральный секретарь
КПСС
номенклатура
USSR
bolshevik
VKP(b)
KPSU
General Secretary
nomenclatura
КУГПІС
Issue Date: 2017
Publisher: Дніпропетровський національний університет ім. О. Гончара, Дніпро
Citation: Кривчик, Г. Г. Однопартійність чи безпартійність: до характеристики політичної системи СРСР: [препринт] / Г. Г. Кривчик // Проблеми політичної історії України : зб. наук. пр. — Дніпро, 2017. — Вип. 12. — С. 214 — 224.
Abstract: UK: Показано, що головною особливістю політичної системи колишнього СРСР була формально однопартійна, а по суті непартійна організація влади, адже КПРС не можна вважати партією в звичайному розумінні цього поняття.
RU: Показано, что главной особенностью политической системы бывшего СССР была формально однопартийная, а по сути непартийная организация власти, поскольку КПСС нельзя считать партию в общепринятом значении данного понятия.
EN: In political science it is accepted that the Soviet Union, unlike developed countries, had one-party system, as the only party in the political system was the Communist Party (RCP (b), the VCP (b), the CPSU). The question of the nature and essence of the one-party political system of the USSR and Ukrainian SSR is considered in detail in the works of both foreign and Ukrainian researchers. They show that the Communist (Bolshevist) Party became the basis of the Soviet political system; that the ruling party used repressive and command-administrative methods for the suppression of any dissent outside and in their party ranks; how the communist party’s nomenclature was formed and operated. Differences in the views of scientists were mostly concerned only the question of whether the Bolsheviks immediately planned elimination of all other parties, or the liquidation followed from the very nature of Bolshevism, authoritarianism, intolerance and intransigence on other ideologies and parties. In our opinion, the first does not exclude the other. Obviously, the case is in essence of Bolshevism, and in party leaders’ intention to establish a monopoly on power. Another question seems to be more principled: is it possible to consider the CPSU as the party in the conventional sense of the word? It is known, that the political party is called an organized group of citizens that represents the interests of various social groups and is committed to realizing its goal by the struggle for state power and its use. Party – is some amount of the politically active population, just part, but not all active population. Indeed, the very word "party" comes from the English "part" – fragment, piece, portion. One party – is essentially the absence of parties. The main feature of the political system of the former USSR was formally a one-party, and actually nonparty organization of power. The CPSU cannot be regarded as a party in the generally accepted sense of this term. It was the institution that was the skeleton of the former USSR. The collapse of the CPSU led to the failure of the existing social order and the end of the Soviet empire.
Description: Г. Кривчик: ORCID: 0000-0001-7504-4575
URI: http://eadnurt.diit.edu.ua/jspui/handle/123456789/10050
Appears in Collections:Статті КУГПІС

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
Krivchik.pdfPreprint150,24 kBAdobe PDFView/Open


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.