East German here, so I don't know all that much of the details of Soviet society before the collapse (but my guess is that the situation wasn't all that different in all former socialist countries).
I would agree that the (East German) state and government was entirely unprepared for its own collapse.
But maybe the people were better prepared because they've been living at the brink of collapse for most of their lives. Shortages of one sort or the other were a normal occurance, you learned quickly to not depend too much on the state, but on family and other people. So when the state "disappeared" people more or less just went on with their business.
And at least in the GDR there was definitely a growing feeling that this couldn't go on for much longer during the 80's, which may have created a "subconscious preparedness".
And of course the "collapse of the GDR" wasn't an "apocalypse-style collapse", but in typical German fashion it was happening very orderly and predictable once the ball was rolling. And (here's a controversial opinion) even though many people had their lives turned upside down in the 90's, lost their job, had to emigrate into the "Golden West", even with all that... being poor in the reunited Germany still was a better life than being "rich" in East Germany (whatever that meant, because there was not much to buy for money anyway).
I'm not sure how people in "the West" would have dealt with its own collapse if the sides had been reversed. Maybe we'll learn in the near future though.
"there was definitely a growing feeling that this couldn't go on for much longer during the 80's"
I heard stories and I'm inclined to believe that it may as well have been just the feeling of later generations. As I understood, people expected things to relapse to previous order since before the WW2, a sentiment shared both by former rich hoping, and by former poor afraid of loosing their benefits. As time passed, all of them gradually accepted things as normal, and the expectation for change was carried on only by following younger generations. I also think that people in North Korea may have had the same feeling for an impending change, especially hearing of USSR collapse, yet that didn't count for much.
This "life always on the brink" preparedness is a major part of what's keeping poor European countries poor.
Everybody distrusts the government, they rely on each other, learn to do things themselves so they don't rely on others. So, money doesn't exchange hands, taxes don't get paid, GDP doesn't grow, more money doesn't get printed.
This is all in a very interconnected world with a mostly free economy, so outsiders just come and buy up everything because at the end of the day, money matters.
Instead of preparing for collapse, how about preparing for being united in work and life and start trusting and depending on each other more.
I agree, but at least looking back that was pretty much the only way to keep going. The government wasn't able to solve (or even recognize) the problems of the "ordinary people", so the people had to deal with solving the problems themselves. Of course this will never be as effective as having an actually functional government, and it will lead to corruption in all levels of society.
The average American didn't (and probably doesn't) distrust their government on anywhere near the same visceral level as someone living in the soviet union.
Had very little to do with Chernobyl and Afghanistan, which were minor interventions. Had everything to do with Gorbachev's policies and underlying LONG-TERM economic problems.
this is false. Long term economic problems were there for years and it could have continued to hobble along with those problems for many more years. But cleaning up Chernobyl specifically cost so much money, that dealing with those problems became practically impossible. Soviet Union couldn't just print dollars like US can.
"Soviet Union couldn't just print dollars like US can."
Any country can print more currency according to Modern Monetary Theory. Also, from Wikipedia:
"The production of Soviet rubles was the responsibility of the Federal State Unitary Enterprise, or Goznak, which was in charge of the printing of and materials production for banknotes and the minting of coins in Moscow and Leningrad. "
If you are trying to draw some sort of conclusion from the idea that the US is an international reserve currency - that has nothing to do with printing money. You can further read the "Economic role" section to understand that the USSR currency was not pegged to PMs or baskets of securities, making it easier to "just print".
"the USSR currency was not pegged to PMs or baskets of securities"
There were a lot of products with their cost in rubles imprinted directly on them, which I guess was supposed to make that currency value "backed by goods" at one point. (It was fun though, after USSR collapse, to get my hands on a cast iron frying pan with its engraved price of a few rubles, and hear that its actual price jumped orders of magnitude at the end of old ruble's circulation, presumably a consequence of "just print".)
As long as there is a demand for American dollars from the abroad, US can print it. MMT says, exporters swap real assets with US dollars.
Is China/Taiwan/Vietnam interested in exchanging their exports with Zimbabwe currency? Zimbabwe's curry is not in a unique position like US dollar. No one wants Zimbabwe, but every one else wants USD.
I mean, sorry, this is a nonsensical point. Of course, Soviet Union could physically print their own currency. This is completely irrelevant - they couldn't print hard currency and that is what they needed to import lots of things, including food.
I would agree that the (East German) state and government was entirely unprepared for its own collapse.
But maybe the people were better prepared because they've been living at the brink of collapse for most of their lives. Shortages of one sort or the other were a normal occurance, you learned quickly to not depend too much on the state, but on family and other people. So when the state "disappeared" people more or less just went on with their business.
And at least in the GDR there was definitely a growing feeling that this couldn't go on for much longer during the 80's, which may have created a "subconscious preparedness".
And of course the "collapse of the GDR" wasn't an "apocalypse-style collapse", but in typical German fashion it was happening very orderly and predictable once the ball was rolling. And (here's a controversial opinion) even though many people had their lives turned upside down in the 90's, lost their job, had to emigrate into the "Golden West", even with all that... being poor in the reunited Germany still was a better life than being "rich" in East Germany (whatever that meant, because there was not much to buy for money anyway).
I'm not sure how people in "the West" would have dealt with its own collapse if the sides had been reversed. Maybe we'll learn in the near future though.