an important reason why intellectuals are eager to change the current situation is that they are dissatisfied with the original system. The Soviet intellectuals did not have the freedom to express their opinions for a long time. The Soviet Communist Party’s strict supervision of knowledge products had a serious contradiction with the intellectuals’ desire for independent thought and expression of their own thoughts.

intellectuals and Gorbachev’s reform

reform is not only for the liberation and development of productive forces, but also for the readjustment of the original pattern of interests. The beneficiaries of the original Soviet system – the KGB and the Soviet army did not welcome the reform. They benefited a lot from the Soviet system. All departments of the Soviet government, especially those related to the military industrial complex, will shake their solid position because of the market-oriented reform of the economic system. Therefore, they do not welcome the reform. It is not only bureaucrats who create obstacles to reform, but also the working class who are not very welcome. According to the sociological survey conducted by the Central Academy of Social Sciences of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union in early 1988, only 15 to 14 of the ordinary staff unreservedly support economic reform and expect to achieve good results in the last two to three years. Others doubt the success of the reform and believe that it will be effective in the distant future. Of those surveyed, only 14 thought it necessary to readjust their work. The reform mainly touches the interests of the economic leadership, commerce, public catering industry, life service industry, management staff and other strata. Their living conditions are better than most residents, have certain privileges, and are not enthusiastic about the reform. The majority of farmers in collective farms, cooperative members and individual workers support reform. The intellectuals of Humanities and social sciences are the most active to the reform. They not only support the reform, but also are a radical social force and an important force to promote the transformation of the focus of reform to the political system.




the important reason why intellectuals are eager to change the current situation is that they are dissatisfied with the original system. In any society, intellectuals engaged in creative work are an important force to promote social progress, especially with the progress of the new technological revolution and the advent of the era of knowledge economy. However, the Communist Party of the Soviet Union did not see the improvement of the people’s cultural level and the enhancement of the role of science and technology and intellectuals, and still adhered to the so-called class principle. When recruiting party members, they only paid attention to making the working class, farmers and women occupy a corresponding proportion in the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, while ignoring the changes in the structure of domestic workers’ power and the active promotion of science, technology and creative intellectuals to the front stage, because these intellectuals have their self-cultivation level and in economy, science Culture plays a more and more important role in the key position of culture. The income of intellectuals is not high. With the development of higher education, many people have to work as ordinary workers. The Soviet intellectuals had no freedom to express their opinions for a long time. The Soviet Communist Party’s strict supervision of knowledge products had a serious contradiction with the intellectuals’ desire for independent thought and expression of their thoughts. They were “forced to wear a tight hoop curse, while the casters were Party committee leaders who knew little about their profession”. “In a period of lack of openness, spiritual stagnation and corruption in our society, the status of social humanistic intellectuals is low, both materially and morally. It is characterized by low wages detrimental to dignity, very limited additional income, low social prestige, and finally, whether in education, medicine, culture, art or science In science, it is impossible to carry out individual creative activities… Social humanistic intellectuals have suffered more than other groups from suppressing democracy, openness, distorting socialist relations and reducing social morality. ” Therefore, they support reform, especially respect for the freedom of creation and the development of openness and democracy.

published the book “no choice” in mid-1988, which can be regarded as a declaration of the power of reform. The book contains the articles of dozens of well-known scholars such as afanasiyev, zaslavskaya, Sakharov, Popov and Xie LiuNing. In the article, the historian bartkin pointed out that because the Soviet society reversed the relationship between politics and economy, the political power became the master of fate, “Therefore, political reform must be realized at the beginning, that is, the political power must be taken from the hands of government institutions and returned to society, that is, to change the current foundation. At the same time, it also means the reform of production relations, that is, the reform of today’s superstructure, that is, to restore them (the whole business activities, as well as all other activities, spiritual and practical activities, scientific and technological activities, medical activities, educational activities, etc.) should be independent, primary and basic “. Economist zaslavskaya proposed: “The functions of the party, the state and economic management should be completely divided and the unnecessary and harmful supervision of enterprise economic activities by political organs should be abolished. Party organs should focus on solving the strategic problems of social and political development, deeply study and publicize Marxist thought, and select, educate and evaluate cadres. Soviet administrative organs should focus on strengthening legal order and socialist law To ensure the comprehensive social and economic development of all regions and meet the material and social needs of residents. ” At that time, people regarded the reform of the system as a guarantee to overcome the interests of the people, and almost regarded it as a guarantee to overcome the resistance of the people to participate in the political reform. From these representative remarks, we can see that they generally believe that the existing political system of the Soviet Union is undemocratic and unscientific. A democratic political system with supervision and balance should be established to make citizens responsible for social development and decision-making.

before the 19th representative meeting of the Soviet Communist Party, the intellectual community was particularly active and many groups were established. In the spring of 1988, a cross Club political group was established with the participation of “monument”, “democratic reform”, “reform-1988” and “people’s consultation”. Its leaders include Chubais, Gusev and Lei Xianke. They spoke to the 19th Party Congress and asked to speed up the pace of reform. Many members of the Soviet Communist Party also participated. Many intellectuals participated in the election of people’s representatives in March 1989Run for people’s representative. From the political power at that time, although there were all kinds of candidates, the competition and choice were mainly carried out among the “Democrats” of the Soviet Republic. In addition to the “registered dignitaries”, the electors are mainly representatives of radical groups and intellectuals. Their campaign slogan is mainly to call for the establishment of a democratic society, the realization of social justice, security, clean environment, etc. In many cases, such candidates have defeated “official” competitors in the election, which reflects the serious crisis of the regime. The Communist Party of the Soviet Union did not create conditions for the Soviet people to exercise political rights and carry out democratic political training. The political body of the Soviet Union created people who were closed, tame, passive, blind and with low ability to participate in politics. Therefore, eloquent intellectuals have been more recognized by the people.

in the Russian Federation, 232 people participated in the election (the total number of election representatives in Russia was 645). As a result, 78% of the senior leaders lost the election and 47% of the middle-level leaders lost the election. On the contrary, 72% of intellectuals won the election. Among Russia’s 645 delegates, intellectuals accounted for 28%, party and government officials 21%, workers 16%, enterprise managers 14%, peasant leaders 13% and peasants 8%. In urban areas, intellectuals account for 37% of the elected representatives. As Akayev said when evaluating the behavior of Professor Sobchak of grad University, “he destroyed the Soviet parliamentary system formed for decades and based on obedience to the Soviet Communist Party with his profound and vivid speech”. Sobchak received 76.5% of the vote in his constituency. Popov, a professor at Moscow University, was also elected by a high vote. The two professors from the first-class universities of the Soviet Union were later elected mayors of Leningrad and Moscow. In fact, the famous Soviet economists such as “bakds” and “yakds” did not have the ability to get rid of the Soviet Union’s crisis, Served as Vice Premier or member of the Political Bureau, but they did not perform better. Abalkin, who directly participated in the formulation of the economic reform plan, did not exceed the level of kosikin at that time. The “500 day plan” put forward by shatalin and others now seems to be simply whimsical.

intellectuals divorced from reality when discussing the reform plan of the Soviet Union. In the Soviet Union, the Communist Party is not only a political party, but also a state organ. The reform should start with the democratization of the party, rather than leaving the Soviet Communist Party as the social stabilizer. The Soviet Union is a big country, and reform should take a gradual approach. However, most intellectuals believe that, The essence of the “Soviet Union” system is the combination of one party regime and the state, and the essence of the state is the combination of one party regime and economy. Because the party is called the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and the state is called the union of Soviet Socialist Republics, this system is regarded as socialism or communism (and Marxism Leninism in ideology) at home and in the world Corresponding embodiment of. From this, we come to a seemingly completely logical conclusion: without the complete elimination of socialism (not only in its actual embodiment, but also in theory), democracy will never win “. Just like the chief researcher of the Institute of philosophy of the Russian Academy of Sciences? Meruyev summarized: “This conclusion quickly dominated the minds of intellectuals who started the reform with passion. They thought they were more thorough Democrats than the advocates of the reform process. I am convinced that they buried the idea of reform. They became the speakers of Yeltsin’s emotions and opinions. What they gave to the reform process was not the nature of improvement, but the nature of real revolution. The Soviet Union The kind of disintegration that actually happened, and then Gorbachev was relieved of power. Although it was caused by rebellion, it was not an example of solving the problem in a legal way and therefore in a democratic way, but more like a coup at the top. ” (running for freedom: Comments on Gorbachev’s reform 20 years later, Central Compilation and Translation Press, 2007, pp. 281-282)

the lessons of the Soviet Union show that it is very important to treat intellectuals correctly in modern society. Intellectuals are the conscience and brain of society. No social system can last long without their recognition and strong support. To let them play their due role, we must respect their labor, provide them with a relaxed environment and give full play to their talents.