Important Notice: Our web hosting provider recently started charging us for additional visits, which was unexpected. In response, we're seeking donations. Depending on the situation, we may explore different monetization options for our Community and Expert Contributors. It's crucial to provide more returns for their expertise and offer more Expert Validated Answers or AI Validated Answers. Learn more about our hosting issue here.

Why was it established as a federal rather than a unitary state when the party was thoroughly centralistic and unitary?

0
Posted

Why was it established as a federal rather than a unitary state when the party was thoroughly centralistic and unitary?

0

I suspect that suggests part of the answer. Because the party was very carefully maintained as a centralized unitary party and because Lenin and Stalin saw it as the principal power center in the Soviet Union, the question of federalism versus centralized government did not mean all that much. The party was going to assure that whatever government there was at Kharkiv or Kiev would not step out of line, would do what the party in Moscow wanted it to do. Consequently some concessions could be made. On the other hand, the federal system as it was established did not make sufficient concessions to the Ukrainians who were part of the political structure in Ukraine, and there was a good deal of grumbling and discontent on their part. Once again the answer that Stalin came up with was that additional guarantees would be made in the direction of Ukrainianization to accommodate the Ukrainian nationalists who felt that the federal structure was drawing them under Russian authority. Q: What did

What is your question?

*Sadly, we had to bring back ads too. Hopefully more targeted.