scholarly journals Situation of Tatars and other Muslim minorities in communist Bulgaria

2021 ◽  
pp. 20-32
Author(s):  
Eldar Kh. Seidametov ◽  
◽  
Keyword(s):  
Soviet Union ◽  
Religious Identity ◽  
Early Stage ◽  
The State ◽  
Marxist Theory ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
The People ◽  
The Government ◽  
Muslim Minorities ◽  
The Way

The article examines the situation of the Tatars and other Muslim minorities in Bulgaria during the communist period. The policy of the state in relation to Muslim minorities after the proclamation of the People`s Republic of Bulgaria and the establishment of socialism in the state according to the Soviet model, when the political, economic and social models of the USSR were imported and introduced without taking into account the national characteristics of Bulgaria, are analyzed. As in the Soviet Union (especially in the early stage of its formation, religion was banned and this applied to all confessions without exception. The Bulgarian Communist Party (BCP) made every effort eradicate religious identity and, in particular, Islamic identity. It was planned to replace the religious ideological fragment with a socialist one, and then, on its platform, form and stimulate the development of the national, modernist and Soviet identity of Muslims. Moreover, the emphasis was also placed on improving the way of life and the material situation of the Muslim population, which, according to the Marxist theory of culture, should have contributed to a more effective formation of socialist consciousness. The ruling party saw in the Muslim religious consciousness and rudiments of the Ottoman past, an obstacle on the way of socialist progress and formation of socialist consciousness. Emasculating elements of the religious worldview from the mind of people, the BCP set itself the task of creating a modern, secular, socialist personality. To this end, in 1946–1989 the government implemented a number of economic, educational and cultural establishments.

scholarly journals Activities of Non-Governmental Organisations Aimed at Conflict Settlement in Post-Soviet States

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexander Nikitin ◽  
Irina Bolgova ◽  
Yulia Nikitina
Keyword(s):  
Soviet Union ◽  
The State ◽  
Soviet Period ◽  
Public Interests ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
International Environment ◽  
International Projects ◽  
The Government ◽  
Public Organisations ◽  
Set Up

This article analyses the peace-making activities of Soviet/Russian nongovernmental public organisations (NGOs) with reference to the Federation for Peace and Conciliation, the successor of the Soviet Peace Committee. NGOs were formed at the initiative of the state and party organs of the Soviet system but were transformed into independent NGOs after the collapse of the USSR with their own active strategy of assistance in conflict resolution. This study is based upon unique archive materials and the personal experience of one of the authors, who used to work for such organisations. The study focuses on the ethnopolitical conflicts which took place between the collapse of the USSR and the mid‑1990s. There is a widespread opinion in academic literature that so-called non-governmental organisations set up by the government do not have their own identity, especially during social crises, and passively follow the government’s political line. However, the study of their activities demonstrates that during the first years after the dissolution of the Soviet Union, these organisations initiated a significant number of practical and political projects with the participation of high-ranked representatives of the governments, parliaments, and political parties of both post-Soviet and foreign states and international organisations, including the UN, OSCE, NATO, CIS, etc. This, in turn, played a role as a substantial supplement to classical interstate diplomacy and practically promoted the settlement of certain ethnopolitical conflicts. The archive materials analysed prove that in the early post-Soviet period, a certain inversion in the direction of political and ideological impulses took place, and a number of non-governmental organisations that used to transmit the interests of the Communist Party and state organs to the international environment were able to create new international projects and consultations in the form of “track one-and-a-half” diplomacy, i. e. the informal interaction of officials in the capacity of unofficial experts. And in such cases, it was NGOs which shaped the agenda and transmitted public interests to the state structures of Russia and the CIS states, mediating between fighting sides and amongst representatives of various states, practically assisting the settlement of ethnopolitical conflicts.

The State’s Pot and the Soldier’s Spoon

2019 ◽  
pp. 79-104
Author(s):  
Brandon M. Schechter
Keyword(s):  
Soviet Union ◽  
The State ◽  
Common Cause ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
Red Army ◽  
Vertical Relationship ◽  
The Government

This chapter focuses on provisioning in the Red Army, tracing how soldiers ate, the ways the government positioned itself as provider, and the logic of who deserved more or less food under conditions of extreme shortage. In the first years of the war, the Soviet Union lost its bread basket, making hunger inevitable. Under these conditions, the government's dedication to provide was reaffirmed to soldiers, who were promised ample provisions in return for their service. Ultimately, it was difficult to imagine such a key resource as food outside of the horizontal bonds between citizens and the vertical relationship to the state. The very term used for rations, paëk, implied mutual obligations. Paëk could be seen as the physical embodiment of the socialist adage “to each according to his work,” as its etymological root implied an earned share in a common cause. The chapter then considers how rations were assembled by the government and later received and used by soldiers at the front—how paëk functioned, was experienced, and occasionally transformed by soldiers.

scholarly journals “Forward to the bright future of socialism!”: the role of images and symbols in promoting collectivization in Soviet Ukraine

2019 ◽  
Vol 63 ◽  
pp. 10003
Author(s):  
Oksana Zhukova
Keyword(s):  
Soviet Union ◽  
Public Information ◽  
The State ◽  
Bright Future ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
The People ◽  
History Of ◽  
Historical Heritage ◽  
National Flag ◽  
The Village

In every country, state symbols such as the national flag, emblem, and national anthems represent the independence and sovereignty of the state. In the Soviet Union as well as in other autocratic states symbols also played an important role in propaganda, influencing peoples’ attitudes to the actions of the state at all levels. These symbols could also be found, together with powerful imagery in posters, on buildings, monuments and many other things visible and incorporated in the routine life the people. Ukraine has huge historical heritage of symbolism and propaganda from when the country was a major part of the USSR. After the creation of the USSR a political, socio-economic, cultural and spiritual experiment on the construction of a communist society, which in the case of Ukraine was unprecedented in scale and tragedy, began. The collectivization of the village is one of the most tragic pages in the history of Ukraine. As the most important grain-growing region of the country at the time its production was vital to feed the growing cities and industrialisation. The forced collectivisation led to starvation in the 1930s and millions of people died. In order to counter this most public information showed people another side of collectivization. Propaganda was used, such as posters and slogans, to persuade the peasants to join the collective farms and to promote the real or fictitious results of the workers, and, conversely, to attack people who did not want to believe in the “bright future” of the USSR and to denounce “kulaks” and “saboteurs”. Materials from archives and published sources show many examples of Ukrainian images and symbols of that time which shed a light on the way the collectivisation process was portrayed and promoted.

Introduction

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-18
Author(s):  
Krista A. Goff
Keyword(s):  
Soviet Union ◽  
The State ◽  
Geographical Range ◽  
Ethnic Conflicts ◽  
History Writing ◽  
Colonial Legacy ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
The People ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Many

This chapter seeks to explain why history writing about nontitular minorities in the Soviet Union and in Azerbaijan has proven to be problematic. It looks at the variety of nontitular communities that live in Azerbaijan and the many ethnic conflicts that emerged during its transition to independence in the late 1980s and early 1990s. It also focuses on the state structures and the people living within Soviet Union and Azerbaijan, as well as their geographical range that intersects with the history of Iran, Turkey, and neighboring republics in the Soviet Caucasus. The chapter describes a regional world that extended beyond Soviet borders and argues that uncovering nontitular histories helps to better understand both Soviet and post-Soviet ethnic conflicts. It mentions the Soviet state that supported the development of minorities to counter the colonial legacy of Great Russian chauvinism.

The Role of the National Problem in the Disintegration of the Soviet Union

2013 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 56-69
Author(s):  
Chaim Shinar
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
Charismatic Leadership ◽  
The United States ◽  
The State ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
The People ◽  
Democratic Polity ◽  
Political Idea ◽  
Independent States

‘The Soviet Union, like the United States, was a country established to serve and promote a political idea, not to be a state for nations. The United States was founded in order to be a modern democratic polity; the Soviet Union in order to promote Marxism-Leninism. The Soviet Union thus began as a ‘modern,’ post-imperialist state. The cement holding the state together was a compound of ideology, a hierarchical, disciplinary party, charismatic leadership, and external treats. [In the 80s] this cement was crumbling… [The Soviet] state had lost its raison d’être and the people turned to the traditional and conventional basis of the state – that is, the nation. But since this was a multinational state – and unlike the multiethnic United States, most peoples in the USSR have distinct languages and territories of their own – [they returned to them to establish independent states.]’1

Stalin and the Politics of Kinship: Practices of Collective Punishment, 1920s–1940s

2008 ◽  
Vol 50 (1) ◽  
pp. 91-117 ◽  
Author(s):  
Golfo Alexopoulos
Keyword(s):  
Soviet Union ◽  
The State ◽  
Political Repression ◽  
Family Ties ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
The People ◽  
Criminal Legislation ◽  
Collective Punishment

At a Kremlin reception on 7 November 1937, Stalin declared that enemies should be eliminated as kinship groups: “And we will eliminate every such enemy [of the state and peoples of the USSR]… . we will eliminate his entire lineage (rod), his family! … Here's to the final extermination of all enemies, both themselves and their clan (rod).”1In the Soviet Union, political enemies were rounded up in groups of kin, family ties marked people as disloyal, and “counterrevolutionary” charges against one person threatened also his or her relatives. The Soviet security police or OGPU-NKVD issued detailed instructions regarding the punishment that should be assigned to the spouses, children, siblings, parents, and even ex-wives of state enemies. Campaigns against anti-Soviet elements rounded up kinship groups, whether these counterrevolutionaries were identified as so-called kulaks, enemies of the people, or traitors to the motherland. To be sure, the collective punishment of kin did not accompany every act of Stalinist repression. The regime's draconian criminal legislation also constituted a form of terror, yet persons sentenced under such laws as those punishing theft of socialist property were dealt with individually; their relatives were not targeted. Only the “politicals,” that is, people accused of disloyalty, treason, or other counterrevolutionary activities experienced terror as family units. It was the collective punishment of kin that made political repression under Stalin truly a mass phenomenon.

Question of New Aggressive Acts by the United States Air Force Against the Soviet Union

1960 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
pp. 578-579
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
Air Force ◽  
Security Council ◽  
United States Air Force ◽  
The United States ◽  
The State ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
Draft Resolution ◽  
The Government

From its 880th through its 883d meetings the Security Council considered the charge by the Soviet Union that the United States had, through aggressive acts committed by its Air Force against the Soviet Union, created a threat to universal peace. Mr. Kuznetsov (Soviet Union) was the first speaker. Noting that it had been a mere two months since the Council had last debated the aggressive actions of the United States in a similar situation, he indicated that members of the Council were aware of the fact that on July 1, 1960, an RB–47 six-engined armed bomber reconnaissance aircraft of the United States Air Force had violated the state border of the Soviet Union, whereupon it had been shot down, two of the crew members subsequently being picked up in Soviet territorial waters. It seemed clear, he continued, that there had been no substance to the promise of the United States President to suspend flights of United States aircraft over Soviet territory; moreover, those allies of the United States which allowed the latter to use bases on their territory “for aggressive purposes against the Soviet Union" must be considered accomplices of the United States in these aggressive acts. Believing it necessary for the Security Council to take measures to make the United States stop provocative actions against other countries, Mr. Kuznetsov presented a draft resolution” to the Council, whereby it would condemn the violations of the sovereign rights of other states by the United States Air Force and regard them as aggressive acts, and would, further, insist that the government of the United States take immediate steps to put an end to such acts and to prevent their recurrence.

scholarly journals HISTORICAL MEMORY AND PATRIOTISM OF EVERYDAY LIFE

2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (3/2) ◽  
pp. 161-174
Author(s):  
G. S. SHIROKALOVA
Keyword(s):  
Soviet Union ◽  
Everyday Life ◽  
Historical Memory ◽  
The State ◽  
Sociological Research ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
Great Patriotic War ◽  
Patriotic Education ◽  
The Face ◽  
The Government

The article investigates the reasons for rejection of patriotism during  the preparation and the collapse of the Soviet Union. Among  them we distinguish the material and other possibilities of so-called  “offshore aristocracy” for the management of public opinion in order  to maintain their status through the destruction of sacred  relationship to the history and the state, which was inherent to the  Soviet mentality. The loss of spiritual base could lead to the  destruction of the Russian Federation according to the scenario of  the Soviet Union, that’s why the government - unable to find a new  national idea – had to appeal to the people’s exploit during the Great Patriotic War as a manifestation of the highest level of patriotism.  Since the beginning of the 2000`s, patriotic education becomes the  direction of public policy. Its effectiveness can be measured through  the empirically observable indicators of attitude to historical events  and modernity. The author believes that the historical memory is a  necessary, but insufficient condition for the patriotism formation. Patriotism of everyday life is the feature that brings social  stability to the state. The article presents the data of  sociological research of the youth’s attitudes to the Great Patriotic  War, which was conducted in Nizhniy Novgorod in 2015. The author  comes to the conclusion that as a result of wide-ranging preparation  to 70th anniversary of the Victory, the historical memory was  actualized. However, the question remains how long it will be  possible to maintain the historical identity in the face of increasing social and economic crisis.

scholarly journals How Banyumas people “describe" G30S/PKI in the novel Ronggeng Dhukuh Paruk

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 96
Author(s):  
Khristianto Khristianto ◽  
Widya Nirmawalati
Keyword(s):  
The State ◽  
The Political ◽  
New Order ◽  
The Novel ◽  
Innocent People ◽  
The People ◽  
The Government ◽  
Political Turmoil ◽  
The Way ◽  
The Hamlet

The novel RDP came out in 1982, when the new order regime was still firmly established. One of the important criticisms in the work was the "incorrect" handling of communism by the government at that time following the eruption of the G30S/PKI history. The author of the novel tries to bring a different view of the issue. This paper tries to present how the original Banyumas personified the political turmoil-how the laypeople interpreted the events that had consumed them as victims, or the sacrificed. Based on the recurrent reading of the Indonesian-language RDP novel and Javanese language Banyumasan, the authors firmly state that the people of Dukuh Paruk are merely victims of the outside world. People of the hamlet have no idea what they are doing, other than that they want to perpetuate the tradition they are proud of, ronggeng. Nor do they blame or think that there are people outside of those who have committed crimes against them. The disaster that befall them is none other due to their mistakes do not run the rituals that must be done before performances ronggeng. Their elders also realized that the pageblug had been signaled by the appearance of the latitude of the cubes (comets), and they had ignored the cue. Thus, pageblug should be accepted. Against the innocence of clean thought, the author asserts that something is wrong with them, systematically practiced by the regime at that time. He agreed that the coup was false; but the way in which the state deals with such problems is also unjustifiable. The state has clearly punished many Indonesians without trial, and killed thousands of innocent people.

Vyatka Revolutionaries in the “Government Facility”: 1905—1913

2018 ◽  
pp. 793-808
Author(s):  
Alexander S. Masyutin ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Soviet Union ◽  
Russian Revolution ◽  
Political Prisoners ◽  
High Profile ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
The People ◽  
Penal Institutions ◽  
History Of ◽  
Party Members ◽  
The Government

The article analyses various aspects of the life in prison of political prisoners of the Vyatka gubernia. Unpublished documents from the archives of Kirov and Moscow, on which this study is based, designate the subject of the study; that is, they allow to establish forms of resistance of political prisoners to prison regime, to identify patterns of their escapes, to trace dynamics in occupancy of political prisons in the Vyatka gubernia, to establish instances of interaction between representatives of different left parties while in penal institutions. The timeframe of the study is the period of the first Russian revolution of 1905-1908, when prisons ceased to be the tenement of few and far between ardent revolutionaries from the privileged strata of society, and swarmed with much less versed ideologically masses of the discontented. Thus, in view of a participant of the revolutionary events of 1905-1908, Socialists-Revolutionary Maximalist G. A. Nestroev, the ideological grounding of the political prisoners deteriorated significantly. The author, however, believes that this ‘diversity’ of prisoners allows to conduct a more thorough analysis of their public activity in prison and to better link the activities of prisoners with the people on whose behalf the revolutionary forces acted. The author focuses on the Socialists-Revolutionaries, as their percentage among prisoners was much higher than that of the Socialists-Democrats. Known for several high-profile assassinations, the former were considered more dangerous state criminals than the Socialists-Democrat ‘propagandists,’ and thus were subject to more severe punishments. After the October revolution 1917, the Bolsheviks created an extensive mythologized literature on fellow party members who served time in tsarist prisons but mentioned only several Socialists-Revolutionaries, and these were politically harmless, or deceased (like E. S. Sazonov), or attached to the Bolshevik party (like V. N. Rukhlyadev). Findings and conclusions of the article can be used in research of the later periods in the history of Russia and the Soviet Union, particularly, for comparison of the prisoners’ struggle with the prison administration and of the forms of assistance to prisoners from the outside in tzarist Russia and later.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document