describe the fall of communism in europe?

Answer 1

I'd best describe it as a train, starting slowly, then gathering speed until it was out of control, then ending in a big crash.

After Khruschchev's ouster, two old-liners, Alexei Kosygin and Nikolai Brezhnev, assumed power (there was a guy Andropov too, but he didn't last long). Brezhnev eased Kosygin out, so he ran the Kremlin in the old-fashioned way.

Then a new guy, Mikhail Gorbachev, took over. (I think he overthrew Brezhnev in a parliamentary coup.) "Gorby" was the first educated communist leader since Lenin. I think he was trained in economics, and he rose through the Party hierarchy.

Anyway, he took over and instituted reforms: (1) "glastnost" (openness) and (2) perestroika (structural reform). These were political and economic. At about the same time (early 80s?) a dock worker and union organizer, Lech Walesa, led a big strike in Poland as part of his "Solidarity Movement".

Walesa was pushing the envelope, taking advantage of newly allowed freedoms. But I don't think Gorbachev could handle the situation very well; he had a full plate back in Moscow trying to manage reform while still adhering to the communist party line. From time to time, Moscow would put Walesa in jail during a crackdown, then they'd let him out again. Walesa sort of reminds me of Gandhi.

The Polish pope, John Paul II, added to the frenzy with visits to his homeland. The western media reported widely on events in Poland. In a famous sound bite, referring to the Berlin Wall, President Reagan rhetorically addressed the Soviet leader: "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!"

New freedoms appeared in other Eastern European nations. There was more freedom to associate, more freedom of the press, more free speech, more freedom of movement. Then a crack appeared in the secure Iron Curtain border: it became possible to cross the border from Czechoslovakia and Hungary into Austria, and thence into West Germany, ostensibly to visit relatives.

The leak in the dike became a flood of refugees, especially from East Germany, where Stalinist Willy Brandt was resisting Gorbachev's reforms as best he could. Soon, border guards just looked the other way as humanity moved westward.

This went on, totally out of control, for a while, and then, one night, people started tearing down the notorious Berlin Wall while guards just watched. German reunification was in sight!

Meanwhile, Gorbachev was having his troubles in Moscow. He and Reagan became good buddies, and Gorby was a hero to westerners, but he was in hot water at home. His economic reforms caused many to slide into poverty. Politically, he tried to restructure the Soviet Union as federation of independent communist states (I forgot the name of the entity), but it was a political morass.

The right wing of the Communist Party -- the old-line Stalinists -- kidnapped Gorbachev from his summer dacha (in Georgia, I think) in an attempt to effect a coup. But at the moment of crisis, the popular, hard-drinking mayor of Moscow, Boris Yeltsin, stood on top of a truck with a bullhorn and ordered his troops to secure the Kremlin. He'd already dispatched loyal troops to arrest the anti-Gorbachev plotters.

The coup failed, and Yeltsin was a hero. Gorbachev's life had been saved, but his political career was over. Yeltsin took over, and when he did, the last vestiges of communism were dismantled. (Remember, Gorbachev tried to effect reform the framework of communism. Yeltsin did away with that.)

I did this from memory, so there may be errors, but this is what I remember.

[Edit] Dunrobin (see below) is right; my memory is somewhat faulty. Erich Honecker was the East German guy, not Willy Brandt; Mikhail Gorbachev was elected head of the Soviet Union following the death of someone else; and the C.I.S. (Confederation of Independent States, the name I forgot) was formed when the U.S.S.R. dissolved in 1991. In other respects, what I wrote is essentially correct.

Answer 2

Fall Of Communism In Europe

Answer 3

BPI guy's memory is slightly faulty. LEONID Breznev died in office, as did his two successors before Gorbachev took over. Willy Brandt was the chancellor of West Germany until 1974, not a Stalinist leader of East Germany in the 1980s.

Anyway, the Eastern economies were teetering on the brink as others have noted, and Gorbachev had hoped to strenghten Communism but removing some of the restrictions on freedom. However this let the genie out of the bottle, and had the unforeseen effect of encouraging small Soviet republics to clamour for independence, and in late 1989 a wave of demonstrations swept the Eastern bloc demanding change, in East Germany, Czechosolvakia, Romania (the only country where regime change was accompanied by violence), and elsewhere. One by one the governments resigned in the face of people power and unlike in the past, the USSR did not prop them up.

This is a broad question and a complicated subject to be asking on a site like this. You should look on some of the major news sites to see if they have a retrospective timeline, or visiting your library.

Answer 4

Communism is an inferior economic system; that is compared to capitalism. The Soviet Union could not keep up with the market driven economies. The Soviet Union could not keep out the western influences which was exposing the inadequacies to its general population. The Soviet Union could keep up with the productivity of the U.S. in military armament. So Gorbachev agreed to tear down the Iron Curtain. China also has modified its government to allow its ecomomy to grow. The bottom line is people are more productive if they know they will be rewarded. Everything is coummunity property is a communist state with no freedom of expression.

Answer 5

To make a story short, it all started in Poland with a strike. Then came along the Russian Premier and promoted a review and criticism of the system. Over time, he Berlin Wall was destroyed. Every country which was under communism rule came crumbling down and they became independent States. The USSR was divided among several new countries which at the end led the nationalist to fight for their own country. Like Yugoslav is now divided in 3 different Nations

Answer 6

It was primarily an economic collapse, maintaining an empire as large as the Soviet Union, tests the strength of the economy. The Soviets had a very large border to patrol, from Norway south to Turkey; East Germany to the borders with China. Not all the nations under the control of the hammer and sickle were to pleased, I know met many defectors from every communist bloc nation. Empires are a waste of money and man power, when will people learn that.

Answer 7

The "Commanding Heights" is a good PBS series that covers the fall or decline of communism and socialism in several places. They have it on DVD/ VHS. See if you can get it at your library. It is also in book form and is easy to read. I used it in my M.A. program and it is widely used by International Studies people.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Commanding_Heights#Russia.2FSoviet_Union

Commanding Heights: The Battle for the World Economy is a book by Daniel Yergin and Joseph Stanislaw. In 2002, it was turned into a documentary of the same title, and later released on DVD.

Commanding Heights attempts to trace the rise of free markets during the last century, as well as the process of globalization. It takes its title from a speech by Vladimir Lenin, who used the phrase "commanding heights" to refer to the segments and industries in an economy that effectively control and support the others, such as oil, railroads, banking and steel.

Answer 8

Two names immediately come to mind: Lech Walesa (flag-bearer of the Solidarity movement) and Mikhail Gorbachev (initiator of Glasnost and Perestroika).

Both good peeps (imho), so you can blame (or praise) them for this.

Besides that, the form of Communism that ruled over the Iron Curtain was doomed to fail from it's very beginnings.

Real political power does NOT come from and be perpetuated by the barrel of a gun... :)

Answer 9

All of the answers have merit, but without the overwhelming dominance of the US military over the Soviets, they never would have fallen voluntarily.

Answer 10

It started in 1919. The rest I don't have time for.