With the collapse of the Soviet Union, so did the Soviet Union's economic reforms. From the point of view of causation, the failure of the Soviet Kosygin reform was an important cause of the collapse of the Soviet Union, not its result.
In fact, since Stalin's death, successive Soviet leaders have noted the importance of reforms and have undertaken some practical reforms, but none of the Soviet economic reforms have solved the substantive problems of the Soviet Union's lagging economic development, including the later effective Kosygin reforms.
From this point of view, the economic reform of the Soviet Union was only "reform", not to the point of innovation, which doomed a series of Soviet economic reforms such as the Kosygin reforms to failure.
From the mid-to-late 1950s onwards, the reform of the Soviet Union's economic system began. At that time, the main measures of reform were to decentralize the operational autonomy of enterprises and expand the authority of Soviet factories in planning management and other aspects. The essence of this economic structural reform is still a minor tinkering with the Stalin model, and has not touched on the fundamental drawbacks.
In 1962, with the support of the soviet leader Khrushchev, the Soviet economic community launched a year-long discussion on the "Liberman Proposal", that is, to explore in depth the various problems existing in the Soviet social economy, especially in the aspect of the commodity economy. Although the discussion did not produce a substantive opinion, a small number of companies adopted some of the experiments of the proposal and achieved a corporate rebirth.
After Brezhnev came to power, in the face of the continuous downturn in the Soviet economy, he made clear demands to the Soviet economic community, hoping that they would start a discussion on how to revitalize the Soviet economy. With Brezhnev's support, the Soviet economic community responded enthusiastically, the most prominent of which was Lisichkin's article "Life Proposes Amendments". The article believes that it is extremely unreasonable to regard the planned economy as the only means of national economic development, and as long as the planning is combined with the market, the sustainable development of the economy can be obtained.
Under the influence of Lisichkin's theory, the Soviet government decided to carry out a new round of economic reforms. On July 3, 1965, Brezhnev, in a meeting with students at the Kremlin, said: "At present, the central government is formulating a plan for economic reform to enhance the economic stimulus effect in the national economy."
On September 27, 1965, Kosygin, then Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the USSR, delivered a lengthy report entitled "On the Correction of Economic Stimulus in Industrial Management" at the meeting. He proposed that it is necessary to improve the work of the planned economy and strengthen the operational initiative and stimulation of enterprises, which marks the beginning of Kosygin's reform.
On October 4, 1965, the Council of Ministers of the USSR formally approved the Regulation on Socialist State-owned Production Enterprises, which discussed and elaborated on many aspects of the economic reform of enterprises. By 1966, soviet economic reforms, chaired by Kosygin, were in full swing in the Soviet Union. It is reported that at that time, a total of 43,000 enterprises in the country adopted the new economic policy, accounting for 94% of the total industrial output value of the Soviet Union, and the weight was not small.
Compared with the economic reforms of the Khrushchev period, the economic reforms presided over by Kosygin have significantly expanded in terms of corporate autonomy.
On the one hand, it expands the autonomy of enterprises in using funds for large-scale production, and also establishes corporate funds for corporate disposal by enterprises themselves, which is essentially very similar to today's corporate "small treasury". On the other hand, the economic reforms presided over by Kosygin allowed for the material satisfaction of enterprise members through the reform of the wage system for enterprise members. The "full accounting policy", which was completely close to the market, allowed the Soviet economy to make a new leap forward.
As a result of the introduction of the new economic system, the Soviet economy has obviously experienced new growth. In 1966, for example, the 704 enterprises that implemented the new economic reform were ahead of the entire industry in terms of total production and product sales, and their profits were far more lucrative than during the Khrushchev period.
However, just as Kosygin's reforms were booming, they encountered numerous obstacles from within the Soviet Union.
In addition to the problems of the new economic system itself, the attack of conservative forces in the Soviet Union was the main reason why Kosygin's reforms were difficult.
Lalayantz, then vice chairman of the State Planning Commission of the USSR, expressed firm opposition to Kosygin's reforms. He believed that without the regulatory role of the planned economy, the Soviet economy would suffer indescribable harm. To this end, the conservative leaders of the Soviet Union also lobbied Brezhnev vigorously to stop Kosygin's reforms immediately.
What is more serious is that under the manipulation of Soviet conservatives, the Soviet ministries and commissions still manage enterprises almost according to the old way, which makes Kosygin's reforms difficult.
In fact, after more than half a century of Stalin's model, the Soviet bureaucracy has formed a cobweb-like power exchange relationship, and if reform is to be carried out, it is bound to launch an attack on the Soviet bureaucracy, which is not tolerated by the bureaucratic privileged group. In addition to rigid institutional ideas, Brezhnev, then leader of the Soviet Union, was also a major member of the bureaucracy, and from this point of view, the Waterloo of Kosygin's reforms was also an inevitable result.
By the late 1970s, The Kosygin reforms had virtually come to a standstill and economic development tended to lag behind. When Kosygin stepped down, the stalled Kosygin reforms were also "euthanized".