Становление советской идеократии как новой эффективной формы централизованного государства в XX веке (1917 – 1953)

Abstract

The purpose of this article is to analyze the evolution of the Soviet ideocratic management model in the period 1917 - 1953. The principles of comparative, historical and institutional analysis are used as a methodological basis. Particular attention is paid to the evolution of the theoretical ideas of Marxism in the works of V.I. Lenin, who introduces the provision on the special role of the party, capable of leading the proletariat, which in subsequent years becomes the central ideological position of the Soviet state and is borrowed in practice by other regimes. Since the period of the mid-1930s, after the consolidation of power, I.V. Stalin made a number of attempts to separate the governing bodies of the ministerial vertical and the apparatus of the CPSU (b), but in view of the approaching war, such projects were not implemented. The monolithic power of the Council of People's Commissars and the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks, united by the State Defense Committee, will turn out to be one of the decisive factors for the victory of the USSR in the war, since it will allow organizing the economy and management in such a way that in many indicators of the production of military equipment the Soviet Union will be several times larger than Nazi-occupied Europe. In the post-war years, new attempts will be made to organize the separation of powers in the Soviet state, but to no avail, which will become the reason for subsequent transformations during the reign of N.S. Khrushchev. It is concluded that the consolidation of the administrative apparatus became the most important factor in the victory of the USSR in the war, but the merging of the government and party vertical turned out to be the reason for attempts to reform in subsequent years. As a result of the analysis, the stages of the formation of the Soviet ideocracy were revealed. The theoretical significance of the work lies in the possibility of using the obtained results for the subsequent comprehensive comparative analysis of different ideocratic regimes.