‘Dekhrushchevisation’ Accomplished

Abstract

Like any other document, the new edition of the CPSU Programme also offers itself for varied interpretations. Recently approved, the Programme reflects the culmination of the campaign of ‘deKhrushchevisation’, which was started by Brezhnev and his colleagues just immediately after the dismissal of Khrushchev from the highest post of the Soviet Communist Party. A reading of various documents, such as reports submitted to Party Congresses held in the period from 1964 to 1986, convey that all these documents expressed different shades of the ‘deKhrushchevisation’ campaign. It is indeed interesting to study the unfolding and the ultimate accomplishment of the ‘deKhrushchevisation’ campaign. The present paper is an elaboration of the view that the Soviet polity has witnessed in the period of more than two decades since October 1964 an accomplishment of the campaign of “deKhrushchevisation.” It was the frontal Khrushchevian attack on Stalin which made the 20th CPSU Congress of 1956 a highly significant event in the annals of Soviet history. The world, however, noticed within eight years after this event that Nikita Khrushchev himself was relieved of the responsibilities of the Party Chief in the USSR. And then the successors of Khrushchev undertook the campaign of ‘deKhrushchevisation’, of course, in a very skilled manner. They were thus quite different in their practice, if compared to their predecessor. As everybody knows, Khrushchev showed extraordinary enthusiasm, first in openly denouncing Stalin in the 20th Party Congress and later in removing Stalin's dead body from the Kremlin Mausoleum in the 22nd Party Congress. Brezhnev and his colleagues, on the other hand, relied on using symbolic words and phrases such as ‘subjectivism’, ‘voluntarism’, “harebrained schemes”, and so on while criticising their predecessor. We thus observe that the sophisticated manner in which the Khrushchevian policies and practices were criticised by Brezhnev and Kosygin indicated a change in style on the part of the new leadership. Later events revealed that Khrushchev's successors changed not only the style but also the programmes and policies of Khrushchev as well. It was Andropov who became the Party-Chief after the death of Brezhnev. His term, of course, proved to be a short affair. Chernenko, who later occupied the post of the Party Chief was again in office for a short time. What is notable is the fact that Andropov, and Chemenko as well, carried forward during their short tenures the legacy of reversing Khrushchevian acts. Mikhail Gorbachev, the present incumbent of the highest post in the CPSU, seems to be quite enthusiastic in putting an end to the excessively utopian and romantic ideas propagated by Nikita Khrushchev. The New captain of the CPSU has indeed completed the campaign of deKhrushchevisation. We must first of all, analyse the genesis of the ‘deKhrushchevisation’ campaign. This sort of analysis must be followed by the review of the campaign proper. Such a review will enable the reader to know not only the content but also the different phases of the whole campaign. Finally we propose to compare and contrast the redrafted Party Programme with the original draft approved during the 22nd Party Congress under the leadership of Khrushchev.