Justice, Inequality, and the Market: Soviet Sociology in the Transition to Capitalism

Abstract

This essay examines the role played by Soviet sociology in the USSR’s transition to capitalism. It analyzes the discipline’s contribution to the critique of Soviet socio-economic life during the 1980s, identifying the emergence of two divergent viewpoints within Soviet sociology over the relationship between inequality, the market, and the goals of a socialist society. The essay explores how these viewpoints intersected with the implementation of economic reforms by the Gorbachev regime, arguing that the dominant forces within Soviet sociology ultimately helped the party-state bureaucracy craft the legitimizing ideology of perestroika by insisting that growing social inequality and market-based mechanisms of distribution were the very embodiment of socialism. After enduring a politically fraught and semi-pariah existence for much of its history, Soviet sociology enjoyed a belle epoque as it helped the ruling elite navigate the transition to capitalism.

Teaching in Unfamiliar Terrain: Empowering Student and Teacher Learning through a Photography Assignment

“…While sociology has been practiced in the area that is now Kazakhstan since the 1960s, it was developed within the USSR paradigm of sociology (Seidumanov et al 2014). In the early twentieth century, sociology was practiced with great enthusiasm in neighboring Russia (Kultygin 2003), yet its association with “bourgeois social science” led to repression in 1924, when the term sociology was banished from the newly formed Soviet Union (Grant-Friedman 2014; Greenfeld 1988). As evidenced by the purging of the intelligentsia in the 1920s and 1930s, the party-state bureaucracy showed hostility toward any investigation of socioeconomic dynamics in the USSR, including (ironically) the study of social class relations (Grant-Friedman 2014).…”

“…In the early twentieth century, sociology was practiced with great enthusiasm in neighboring Russia (Kultygin 2003), yet its association with “bourgeois social science” led to repression in 1924, when the term sociology was banished from the newly formed Soviet Union (Grant-Friedman 2014; Greenfeld 1988). As evidenced by the purging of the intelligentsia in the 1920s and 1930s, the party-state bureaucracy showed hostility toward any investigation of socioeconomic dynamics in the USSR, including (ironically) the study of social class relations (Grant-Friedman 2014). After the death of Joseph Stalin and accompanying social reforms throughout the USSR known as the “Thaw,” sociology was resurrected, and the Soviet Sociological Association was formed in 1958 (Greenfeld 1988; see also Grant-Friedman 2014).…”

“…As evidenced by the purging of the intelligentsia in the 1920s and 1930s, the party-state bureaucracy showed hostility toward any investigation of socioeconomic dynamics in the USSR, including (ironically) the study of social class relations (Grant-Friedman 2014). After the death of Joseph Stalin and accompanying social reforms throughout the USSR known as the “Thaw,” sociology was resurrected, and the Soviet Sociological Association was formed in 1958 (Greenfeld 1988; see also Grant-Friedman 2014). The development of sociology in the USSR was a party directed process, and the key reason for sociology’s “rehabilitation” was a desire for accurate empirical information that could be used to create and implement various policies of reform ( perestroika ) (Grant-Friedman 2014; see also Greenfeld 1988).…”

“…After the death of Joseph Stalin and accompanying social reforms throughout the USSR known as the “Thaw,” sociology was resurrected, and the Soviet Sociological Association was formed in 1958 (Greenfeld 1988; see also Grant-Friedman 2014). The development of sociology in the USSR was a party directed process, and the key reason for sociology’s “rehabilitation” was a desire for accurate empirical information that could be used to create and implement various policies of reform ( perestroika ) (Grant-Friedman 2014; see also Greenfeld 1988). As a result, Soviet sociology had an overwhelming empirical focus, and sociologists worked closely with Party leaders (Grant-Friedman 2014; see also Burawoy 2009).…”

“…The development of sociology in the USSR was a party directed process, and the key reason for sociology’s “rehabilitation” was a desire for accurate empirical information that could be used to create and implement various policies of reform ( perestroika ) (Grant-Friedman 2014; see also Greenfeld 1988). As a result, Soviet sociology had an overwhelming empirical focus, and sociologists worked closely with Party leaders (Grant-Friedman 2014; see also Burawoy 2009). A clear distinction was created between “bourgeois sociology,” which was subject to criticism and repression, and Soviet (Marxist-Leninist) sociology (Greenfeld 1988:100; see also Grant-Friedman 2014).…”