From: utzoo!decvax!harpo!eagle!mhtsa!ihnss!ihuxi!otto
Newsgroups: net.space
Title: Science in the Soviet Union
Article-I.D.: ihuxi.174
Posted: Sat Jun 26 11:41:41 1982
Received: Mon Jun 28 08:12:56 1982


I think that to say that Japan, the USSR, and the USA are all alike in
their potential for scientific research is to misunderstand an important
reality: today, more than ever before, scientific research depends a
great deal on the services and products provided by the society the
research is performed in.  Thus, whereas I think all would agree that
raw scientific talent is distributed *normally* throughout the
populations of all countries, the research that those contries can
perform might be radically different, one from another.

I would like to focus on the differences in support for scientific
research provided by the USA and the USSR.  My information for the
following comes from several sources: the economic theory comes from my
Father, a professor in economics; direct observations come from trips I
have made to Eastern Europe as well as the Soviet Union.

As is well known, the primary difference between the economies of the
two countries is that the Soviet Union has a centrally planned economy,
whereas the USA has a market economy.  With a centrally planned economy,
all decisions about the major allocation of resources is made by a
central group of people; with a market economy such decisions are
distributed to many people in many parts of the economic structure. One
major problem with asking a central group to make *all* decisions about
the allocation of resources in a certain area is that usually the
details to keep track of in that area--what's important, what's not
important, what works, and what doesn't work--is so mind-boggeling that
no one can keep track of it all or understand it all.  As a result,
decisions by the central planners tend to be overly general and hamhanded,
rather than subtle and appropriate.  This tendency for inappropriate
decision making can be aggravated by placing people on the
decision-making committee based on their political beliefs, not on their
knowledge of the areas their decisions will affect. (Of course this
happens in in Washington too, but with distributed decision making the
incompetence of any one individual has less effect.)  One example of the
disasters possible with this kind of system was mentioned by
Solzhenitsyn in *The Gulag Archipelago*, where the central decision
maker Lysenko ordered seeds for the Spring planting to be cast on the
Winter snow, where they were to sprout and grow as soon as the snow
melted.  What actually happened was that the seeds swelled up, grew
moldy, and died.  The fields so planted lay empty for a year.  Those who
knew better than to follow the absurd instructions were labeled as
*wreckers* of the Soviet agricultural system for not following
instructions and were sent to Siberia.

But enough of theory.  The hard reality is that the supply of goods and
services in the Soviet Union today is almost non-existant when compared
with Western standards.  The quality of the products that *are*
available is low.  After drinking the same poor beer across the USSR,
from Siberia to Moskow, I asked why they didn't have a second brand of
beer so that the quality would be improved by competition.  The answer
was that the making of two brands of beer would have involved the needless
duplication of resouces; it was more efficient to have just one brand of
beer for the entire country.

Services in Russia also tend to be poor.  When I was in Bratsk, the
Intourist people decided to impress the group I was with (a group of
West Germans) with the telephone service available.  In the morning,
before we left for a tour of the area, we were each asked to write down
a telephone number in Western Europe we wanted to call.  We were told
that by the time we got back from our tour that evening, some 8 hours
later, that the connections would be completed and we could make our
calls.  What struck me the most in this situation was how proud these
Russians were of what they were showing us.  Clearly, for them, this was
the latest in technological advancement.  A call *outside the country*,
and in only 8 hours!  Wow!

We in the West take the availability of many goods and services for
granted.  And we take their high quality for granted.  How quickly do
you think your research could progress if you were *continually* plagued
with problems such as the following:

   As a respected Soviet Scientist you read an interesting article in
   the one copy of CACM your research group is permitted to receive.
   You want to Xerox the article for your files.  Now let's see, how
   do you convice the Ministry of Science to put someone on the problem
   of how to make a Xerox machine . . . . . . ?  But wait, the political
   consequences must be considered.  A Xerox machine would be a threat
   to the State.  It would permit the easy copying and wide distribution
   of samizdat (underground publications).  No, its too risky even to
   ask.  You don't want to risk even *appearing* to support the samizdat
   movement.  So you pull out paper and pencil and start to copy the
   article by hand . . .



George Otto
Bell Labs, Indian Hill
----------------------