Lately I’ve been watching this Youtube channel. The author grew up in the Soviet Union and knows how it REALLY worked, not our perpetual propaganda. He brings out the SKILL-oriented nature of Soviet economic policy in the automotive area. I’ve seen this focus on SKILL before in electronics and education.
In this clip on the Lada Oka he mentions that Soviet military manufacturers were required to make some consumer-oriented products. It’s universally true that the best engineers end up working for the military. In every country and every era of history, the most original inventions serve war. Russia wanted to turn part of this creativity toward civilian products.
We went the other way starting in 1946, as Ike told us clearly. We gradually gave up our consumer products to Japan and China, and our large companies moved entirely into defense contracts.
= = = = =
Before 1950, good public transit was NOT uniquely Russian. We had streetcars and buses and interurbans in big cities and small towns. After 1950, Russia and most of Europe KEPT good public transit while we destroyed it. With adequate public transit, private cars are not a necessity.**
The Soviet system recognized that cars were a luxury and priced them accordingly. They were legally available, but expensive and produced in low quantities. The situation changed in 1970. Brezhnev ordered mass production, and Ladas were churned out in Europe-level quantities if not quite US-level. By 1980 Russia was mostly carified, but mass transit remained strong.
Before 1970 many Russians made their own cars. The government ENCOURAGED tinkerers to build and modify cars, again helping to DEVELOP SKILLS. Soviet car magazines featured the best DIY cars and published blueprints and tutorials to help beginners.
I noticed the same encouragement in electronics. Soviet radios in the 70s and 80s were still MADE IN THE USSR, and they were made with discrete parts that could be repaired by a local shop or tinkerer. Since 1970 our electronic stuff is made in Japan or China, and it’s explicitly designed to be unfixable. You have to replace the whole thing. The Soviet system kept development and manufacturing skills alive, and encouraged repair and tinkering skills.
In economic terms, the Soviet system fostered production and knowing how to produce, while our system fostered consumption and knowing how to consume.
The same difference showed up in education. Soviet STEM training was experiential, emphasizing teamwork, discussion, and job-like work. Our STEM was theoretical, emphasizing rote memorization of useless theories like Sets and Quantum.
= = = = =
** This clip shows another difference, unrelated to skill. Disabled people couldn’t use public transit, so the Soviet system provided for them. Manufacturers turned out large quantities of ‘invalid cars’, essentially motorized wheelchairs, from 1945 until 1997. They had a variety of adapted controls: hand controls for polio victims, foot controls for veterans who lost arms. All of them were free. Our carmakers weren’t required to turn out adapted cars, so they didn’t. Disabled folks have to buy cars and pay for adaptations.
= = = = =
And while I’m at it, the same author brings out an unexpected dividing line between civilized cultures and uncivilized cultures. The civilized parts of the world (Latin America, Africa, Soviet zone) dislike station wagons and hatchbacks. “Station wagons are hearses and a hatchback is a woman’s car.” Those types are popular in the uncivilized world, North America and Western Europe. Civilized areas prefer three-box sedans.
I can’t figure out the origin of this difference, but it seems to be well known in the civilized areas. Global carmakers don’t try to push SUVs or hatchbacks in areas where Natural Law is still in effect.
Polistra's Mill 