Sure, it was a pervasive piece of reasoning that existed in a system which would kill you if you tried to criticize the pseudoscience du jour. It had a large influence in soviet culture, yep, but it was absolutely not the sole driving force behind things like the Holodomor, or the other many famines.
If you don’t want to understand why a system that forced workers and scientists to lie about production numbers or get shot caused famines during industrial centralization and was the absolute worst thing to have happening concurrently with a direct causal link in two separate countries I can’t make you.
So your argument is that it wasn’t just Lysenkoism, but the political situation at the time which exacerbated the faults of Lysenkoism and lead to conditions allowing for those famines?
Which has incidentally been my entire point this whole time?
Everything is contextual and interconnected, but it was Lysenkoism, only possible under authorianism, that broke the core structural principle of a central command economy.
Lysenkoism isn’t a reference to the actions of Lysenko, it refers to the entire system of failures that created it.
Lysenko’s politically derived pseudoscience that started with ideology instead of evidence combined with Stalinist/Maoist paranoia and conflation of scientific dissent with rebellion and threats to the state created the famines from what would have been shortages during the restructuring.
Sure, it was a pervasive piece of reasoning that existed in a system which would kill you if you tried to criticize the pseudoscience du jour. It had a large influence in soviet culture, yep, but it was absolutely not the sole driving force behind things like the Holodomor, or the other many famines.
If you don’t want to understand why a system that forced workers and scientists to lie about production numbers or get shot caused famines during industrial centralization and was the absolute worst thing to have happening concurrently with a direct causal link in two separate countries I can’t make you.
So your argument is that it wasn’t just Lysenkoism, but the political situation at the time which exacerbated the faults of Lysenkoism and lead to conditions allowing for those famines?
Which has incidentally been my entire point this whole time?
edit: clarity
Everything is contextual and interconnected, but it was Lysenkoism, only possible under authorianism, that broke the core structural principle of a central command economy.
Lysenkoism isn’t a reference to the actions of Lysenko, it refers to the entire system of failures that created it.
Lysenko’s politically derived pseudoscience that started with ideology instead of evidence combined with Stalinist/Maoist paranoia and conflation of scientific dissent with rebellion and threats to the state created the famines from what would have been shortages during the restructuring.
That is all (and more) described by the term.