scholarly journals Stalin's Antiworker “Workerism”, 1924–1931

1995 ◽  
Vol 40 (2) ◽  
pp. 223-258
Author(s):  
Andrea Graziosi

SummaryThis article sketches the background of the development of the “workerist myth” in the Soviet Union in the period 1924–1931. From 1924 onward workers were subjected to mounting pressure to increase productivity and tighten discipline, against the background of the great debate on how to transform the Soviet Union from an agrarian country into a country with a powerful industrial sector as rapidly as possible. Between 1928 and 1929 a vigorous antiworker campaign was launched in the Soviet Press, which in just a few months in the winter of 1929–1930 was transformed into a workerist campaign, glorifying the exemplary shock workers as “enthusiastic builders of socialism”. This myth was used on the domestic as well as on the external front, and meant the ascent to power of the Stalinist elite and the definitive breakthrough of a “national socialism”. It also marked the end of trade unionism as such.

Slavic Review ◽  
1966 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 67-83
Author(s):  
Harvey L. Dyck

In May 1927 Sir Austen Chamberlain precipitated the first great international crisis of the post-Locarno period by denouncing the Anglo-Soviet trade agreement and severing Britain's diplomatic relations with the Soviet Union. Although Germany was not directly involved, the dispute nevertheless was to have a profoundly disturbing effect on German-Soviet relations. By raising the possibility of a wide-ranging diplomatic, economic, and perhaps even military confrontation between London and Moscow, it strained Germany's diplomatic system, which rested on the Locarno Pact (1925) and the Treaty of Berlin (1926). Thus it posed some fundamental questions for the German Foreign Ministry: Were the policies associated with those agreements compatible with each other only in fair weather? Did Germany have the freedom to remain neutral if the dispute should deepen? In short, was it still realistic to believe that Germany could maintain equally intimate ties with London and Moscow? Because Foreign Minister Gustav Stresemann had previously denned a balancing role as the sine qua non of Germany's international revival, the imbroglio soon led to a great debate in the Wilhelmstrasse. The issue on which it turned was, as a leading participant observed, “whether Germany's ties with Russia are worth enough to our present and future political interests so that it pays to assume the political expenses and risks involved in maintaining them.”


2010 ◽  
Vol 69 (1) ◽  
pp. 33-50
Author(s):  
Frank Seberechts

De graficus Frans Van Immerseel is reeds voor de Tweede Wereldoorlog actief in het Vlaams-nationalisme. Hij sluit zich in het begin van de bezetting aan bij de Algemeene SS-Vlaanderen. Wanneer in de zomer van 1941 de Duitse troepen aan de veldtocht in de Sovjetunie beginnen, meldt hij zich als vrijwilliger voor het Vlaamsch Legioen.Van Immerseel wordt aangesteld tot oorlogsverslaggever aan het oostfront. Hij levert illustraties bij de artikels die over de veldtocht verschijnen in de collaboratiepers, zoals Volk en Staat, De SS Man en De Arbeidskameraad. Zijn tekeningen betreffen verschillende onderwerpen: het leven van de Duitse en de Vlaamse soldaten achter het front, soldaten in actie tijdens de gevechten, portretten van Vlaamse oostfrontvrijwilligers, portretten van Sovjetrussische krijgsgevangenen en schetsen van al dan niet door de oorlog getroffen gebouwen en landschappen. Zijn werk sluit nauw aan bij de visie van het nationaal-socialisme op de kunst, terwijl het voorts een belangrijke propagandistische boodschap draagt. De soldaten stralen heldhaftigheid en kracht uit, terwijl de geportretteerde Sovjetburgers uitdrukking moeten geven aan hun veronderstelde culturele en raciale inferioriteit. Meestal ondersteunen de tekeningen de bijdragen waarbij ze verschijnen, maar vele worden verschillende malen gebruikt bij telkens andere artikels.Van Immerseels werk verschijnt tot begin 1943 in de pers. Daarna valt hij in ongenade door de problemen die hij in het Vlaamsch Legioen kent en worden zijn tekeningen niet meer gepubliceerd.________The East Front drawings by Frans Van ImmerseelThe graphic artist Frans Van Immerseel was already active in Flemish Nationalism before the Second World War. At the beginning of the occupation he joined the General SS-Flanders. When the German troops started the campaign in the Soviet Union in the summer of 1941 he signed up as a volunteer for the Flemish Legion.Van Immerseel was appointed war reporter at the East Front. He produced illustrations for articles appearing about the campaign in the collaboration press, such as Volk en Staat (‘People and State’), De SS Man (‘The SS Man’) and De Arbeidskameraad (‘The Labour Comrade’). His drawings concerned various subjects: the life of the German and Flemish soldiers behind the front line, soldiers in action during battles, portraits of Flemish East Front volunteers, portraits of Soviet Russian prisoners of war and drawings of buildings and landscapes both unscathed and damaged by the war. His work followed the vision of National Socialism on art very closely and it also carried an important message of propaganda. The soldiers portrayed heroism and strength, whilst the depicted Soviet citizens were to express their supposed cultural and racial inferiority. Usually his drawings illustrated the contributions along side which they were published, but many of them were used a number of times for several different articles.The work of Van Immerseel was published until the beginning of 1943. Afterwards he fell into disfavour because of the problems he encountered in the Flemish Legion and his drawings were no longer published.


2006 ◽  
Vol 39 (1) ◽  
pp. 144-146
Author(s):  
Paul Robinson

Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, scholarly interest in the inter-war Russian emigration has increased significantly, and numerous works on émigré life, culture, and politics have been published. Given the limited influence that émigrés had on the world around them, much of this work has inevitably been rather introspective, of little interest to scholars outside this narrow field. Michael Kellogg's new book, The Russian Roots of Nazism, is rather different. He argues that one group of White Russian exiles had a decisive influence on the development of the Nazi Party and its leader Adolf Hitler in the early 1920s. His account makes an important contribution not only to the history of the Russian emigration, but also to that of German politics.


2021 ◽  
pp. 265-278
Author(s):  
Maksim Nazarenko

The article considers the industry estimates of the USSR of the late socialist period contained in the works of foreign economists. Particular attention is paid to the sovietological interpretations of the state of the USSR industrial sector as well as the economic policy of Soviet leadership in generating growth of industrial production, development of the Eastern regions of the country, innovation and modernization of fixed assets. The author concludes that the studies conducted by foreign scientists make it possible to clarify the assessment of the industrial sector of the Soviet Union before Perestroika and to adjust the estimates of economic development of the USSR of the “Brezhnev Era”.


1976 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 200-208 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charles E. Greer ◽  
Robin W. Doughty

Current trends in the utilization of wildlife in China continue a tradition of satisfying material needs for meat, apparel, and medicinal and other products. Wild animals have been hunted to bolster income from agriculture and to supply the industrial sector of the economy with material goods. Decisions about conserving or protecting animals are therefore based largely upon utilitarian premises. If they decrease agricultural productivity or are harmful to humans, predatory animals are heavily persecuted.Chinese biologists have followed initiatives, begun in the Soviet Union, of introducing alien animals to areas where they can multiply and be cropped for commercial purposes. Research also continues to be focused on the possible relocation of faunal elements within China, to develop the market for meat and skins.However, there appears to be a growing concern for preserving certain rare, unusual, and threatened, species because they are unique to China or have beneficial or symbolic value. This concern is likely to increase as studies in animal behaviour, migration, and ecology, demonstrate that significant declines have occurred in the populations of many ‘useful’ birds and mammals.


Reviews: An Introduction to Political Sociology, The British Academics, Public Opinion Polls & British Politics, Propaganda, Polls and Public Opinion: Are the People Manipulated?, Government in Action, The Dilemma of Accountability in Modern Government: Independence versus Control, Party Leaders in the House of Representatives, The Senate Institution, The Rumble of California Politics 1848–1970, Political Change in California: Critical Elections and Social Movements, 1890–1966, Old-Age Politics in California: From Richardson to Reagan, Labour and the Left: A Study of Socialist And Radical Influences in the American Labor Movement, 1881–1924, Politics And the Community of Science, The Social Responsibility of the Scientist, Science, Scientists, and Public Policy, The Limited Elite, Interest Groups in Soviet Politics, Political Leadership in Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union, Revolution: The Theory And Practice of A European Idea, Towards Revolution. Volume I: China, India, Asia, the Middle East, Africa. Volume Ii: The Americas, A Study of Revolution, The Natural History of Revolution, The Politics of the Coup D'etat: Five Case Studies, The Fourth Dimension of Warfare. Volume I: Intelligence/Subversion/Resistance, Church and State in Modern Ireland, 1923–1970, The Rift in Israel: Religious Authority and Secular Democracy, The School Prayer Decisions: From Court Policy to Local Practice, The Scientific Origins of National Socialism: Social Darwinism in Ernst Haeckel and the German Monist League, The Ideology of Fascism. The Rationale of Totalitarianism, The Appeal of Fascism. A Study of Intellectuals and Fascism, 1919–1945, Plekhanov: The Father of Russian Marxism, The Collected Works of Jeremy Bentham. Principles of Legislation. An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation, Modern Political Theory, Social Philosophy, Roles and Values, An Introduction to Social Ethics, Political and Legal Obligation, Developing Nations: Quest for a Model, The Scientific Study of Foreign Policy, Truth and Power: Essays of a Decade 1960–70, Social Science and the Idea of Process. The Ambiguous Legacy of Arthur F. Bentley, Heinrich Bruening, Memoiren

1971 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
pp. 465-509
Author(s):  
K. Newton ◽  
Graeme C. Moodie ◽  
Colin Seymour-Ure ◽  
M. J. McDougall ◽  
M. G. Clarke ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 103-131
Author(s):  
Штефан Мерль

Citation: Merl S. (2020) Modernity and the Failure to Maintain the Peace (1918–1938): Comparing the Cases of the Soviet Union and the German Reich. Mir Rossii, vol. 29, no 1, pp. 103–131. DOI: 10.17323/1811-038X-2020-29-1-103-131 Modernity brought the promise of a better world – a world in which society and the economy are more rationally organized and in which people themselves could be improved. In the 1880s, European states began to translate the findings of the social sciences into practical politics (“the scientization of the social”). Once the established monarchies had been overthrown in Germany and in Russia, the new political forces needed to legitimize their claim to power before the people. The most practical way to do so was to exploit the idea that the social could be subjected to scientization, and thus legitimize political domination by means of implementing a new type of rationality. With the transition to Stalinism and National Socialism, their approaches became more radical. Both dictatorships launched large-scale projects to restructure their societies according to the concepts of class and race respectively. They bet on an unprecedented degree of state organization and control over the economy and society. Their economic success in the 1930s owed much to rearmament programs, which could do nothing but resolve into a new war. Today it appears surprising how naively expert advice was handled at that time, such that the complete physical destruction of enemies and the idea that lives could be treated as worthless could be sold as a “scientific” means of creating better societies. In order to understand what happened in the Soviet Union and Germany, one cannot look at it from a single national perspective. That is why I adopt an entangled history approach. The dissemination of modern ideas and the scientization of the social were taking place through a network connecting scholars and thinkers from all over the world. This article sets the inter-war period in the context of the whole period during which the scientization of the social was taking place without any particularly critical reflection (from the 1880s to the early 1970s). In the first part, I present the concepts of Modernity and the scientization of the social and propose a periodization of their political use. In the second part, I  focus more specifically on the events and developments in the Soviet Union and Germany, and the means of political communication by which the legitimization of the new powers were achieved.


2018 ◽  
Vol 60 (4) ◽  
pp. 998-1028
Author(s):  
John Eicher

AbstractThis article compares two German-speaking Mennonite colonies in Paraguay and their encounters with Nazism during the 1930s. It focuses on their understandings of the Nazi bid for transnationalvölkischunity. Latin America presents a unique context for studying the Nazis’ relationship to German-speakers abroad because it held the allure of being the last prospect for German cultural and economic expansion, but was simultaneously impossible for the German state to invade. The Menno Colony was made up of voluntary migrants from Canada who arrived in Paraguay in the 1920s. The Fernheim Colony was composed of refugees from the Soviet Union who settled alongside the Menno Colony in the 1930s. Both groups shared a history in nineteenth-century Russia as well as a common faith and culture. Nevertheless, they developed radically different opinions aboutvölkischnationalism. The Menno Colony's communal understanding of Germanness madevölkischpropaganda about Hitler's “New Germany” unappealing to their local sensibilities. They rejected all forms of nationalism as worldly attempts to thwart their cultural-religious isolationism. The refugees of Fernheim Colony, by contrast, shared little communal unity since they originated from diverse settlements across the Soviet Union. They viewed Germanness as a potential bridge to an imagined German homeland and believed that the highest goal ofvölkischunity was to promote communal unity. Resembling other German-speaking communities in Latin America, the two colonies—which seemed identical to Nazi observers—held vastly different interpretations ofvölkischnationalism at the height of the Nazi bid to establish transnational German unity in Latin America.


1955 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 20-45 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adam B. Ulam

NO analyst of Soviet Communism has failed to express surprise that a Marxist movement should have triumphed in a prevailingly agrarian society. Equally trite has been the observation that the Russian Marxists have not been able to solve the problem of the peasant and his full integration into their socialist system. Marx was a city boy, we are told, and that is why Nikita Khrushchev, the First Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, has to spend his time discussing the failure of Soviet agriculture to keep up with the industrial sector of the economy. We are left with a truly confusing picture. Marxism, on its own premises designed as a movement for fully industrialized societies, comes to power or is a serious contender for power in societies that are mainly agrarian, while mature industrial countries adhere perversely to something (but something that is definitely non-Marxist) variously described as “the social welfare state,” “liberal capitalism,” and the like. Perhaps Marx was wrong and—for reasons unforeseen by him—his system is peculiarly suitable to what we now term “backward” countries, with predominantly agrarian economies and a low standard of living. Then why cannot Marxism solve its central problem of the agrarian economy? Or is it perhaps merely one form of Marxism—Soviet Communism—which is thus incapacitated? No wonder that scholars, first secretaries, and the rest of us tend to become confused.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document