Thread: Western Propaganda aka клюква lol

Yes, It was necessary part in your argumentation if you want to get political decision and make your position safe from your opponents before they strike first.

From middle 30s to early 60s there was a period in USSR, when authorities were intensively "regulating" science using insane "political" criteria and some polluted scientists or quasi-scientists used it as a weapon against their opponents.

Most prominent result of such regulation was the destruction of Soviet genetics and cybernetics, which at some point were keeping world leading positions. Some people argue that it was actually the main cause why USSR lost the cold war.

Originally Posted by it-ogo

Yes, It was necessary part in your argumentation if you want to get political decision and make your position safe from your opponents before they strike first.

From middle 30s to early 60s there was a period in USSR, when authorities were intensively "regulating" science using insane "political" criteria and some polluted scientists or quasi-scientists used it as a weapon against their opponents.

Most prominent result of such regulation was the destruction of Soviet genetics and cybernetics, which at some point were keeping world leading positions. Some people argue that it was actually the main cause why USSR lost the cold war.

May be it is true about genetics, but I still ask what results did bring cybernetics as a science. Soviet history shows that when cybernetics was banned, the USSR had leading positions in computing, robotics, telemechanics and remote control. Conversely when cybernetics became popular I believe under Brezhnev, the USSR started to lack behind. This does not necessarily mean that cybernetics was detrimental, but a natural doubt arises as to what extent it was beneficial.