Protest, Reform and Repression in Khrushchev's Soviet Union

Hornsby, Robert

doi:10.1017/cbo9781139380867

Cited by 44 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The challenges included the 1956 Budapest uprising, popular protests demanding better conditions at home, and the domestic dissident movements. Such challenges were met not only with brute force, but were also dealt with through preventative/prophylactic methods (profilaktika), punitive psychiatry, targeted repressions against particular dissidents, and greater penetration of the KGB (Komitet Gosudarstvennoi Bezopasnosti-Committee for State Security, USSR's main security agency) into the society (see Hornsby 2010). If Stalin's Great Purge was truly terrifying due to its totalizing and annihilating nature visà-vis the society where no one could be safe, Khrushchev's repressions in a milieu of limited liberalization were much less terrorizing and, from the standpoint of those who grew up during that period, perhaps even desirable.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Socialization, Rationality, and Age: Generational Gaps and the Attitudes toward the Chechen War in Russia

Shaykhutdinov

2019

Politics & Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this article, I focus on the factor of age as a determinant of individual support for the use of force by the government. I argue that socialization theory, as a key conceptual frame, should be supplemented by rational choice explanations for understanding individual preferences more fully. Employing survey data on the Chechen conflict, I investigate generational gaps in Russia regarding the government's use of force, and the form those gaps take. Empirically, I substantiate a theoretical claim that several generations exist in Russia, each with its own attitudes and beliefs, including the so‐called “second edition of the Decembrists,” “the people of the ‘60s,” “the people of the ‘70s,” “the generation of perestroika,” “the disappointed generation,” and a “lost generation/mega‐consumers.” I find strong, albeit surprising, evidence of a generational gap in Russia, with respondents born in different time periods, especially “the ‘60s people” and “mega‐consumers” expressing variable attitudes toward the Chechnya conflict. Related Articles Brader, Ted A., and Joshua A. Tucker. 2009. “What's Left Behind When the Party's Over: Survey Experiments on the Effects of Partisan Cues in Putin's Russia.” Politics & Policy 37 (4): 843‐868. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-1346.2009.00201.x Smyth, Regina. 2014. “The Putin Factor: Personalism, Protest, and Regime Stability in Russia.” Politics & Policy 42 (4): 567‐592. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12080 Stegmaier, Mary A., and Gwyn Erb. 2008. “Gender and Generation Gaps in Russian Economic Values during the Yeltsin Years.” Politics & Policy 33 (3): 416‐443. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-1346.2005.tb00802.x

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Socialization, Rationality, and Age: Generational Gaps and the Attitudes toward the Chechen War in Russia

Shaykhutdinov

2019

Politics & Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Outhwaite () reiterates points made by Burawoy () on the importance of moving beyond an elite agency approach where working classes are merely “demobilized” (Eyal, Szelényi, & Townsley, ), to do better justice to the reality of antagonistic class relations after communism. In the historical context, sociology has recently also painted a more nuanced picture of the contested nature of the inner life of industrial socialism and its workers as more than the passive victims of state power (Hornsby, ; Kenney, ; Pittaway, ).…”

Section: The Scholarly Heritage Of Class‐studies—communism As a Labormentioning

confidence: 99%

An agenda for research on work and class in the postsocialist world

Morris

2017

Sociology Compass

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article reviews the scholarly treatment of work and class in postsocialist states. It traces how class discourses under socialism led to a lack of meaningful working class studies in the postsocialist academy. It offers as an agenda for future research three points of departure: (a) greater confrontation of the one‐sided discourse on class in these societies and the academy itself (class blindness of research). (b) The value in studying postsocialist societies both comparatively to global North and South, and as an intermediate positioning for worker exploitation and responses in global capitalism. (c) To achieve the first 2 agenda items, a more grounded methodological approach proceeding from the lived experience of class and work is proposed. Current research on social networks, memory studies and personhood, the informal economy, deindustrialization, and the “domestication” of neoliberalism show that empirically grounded work on postsocialist working classes can make important contributions to wider social science debates. Studying the “losers” of postcommunist transition can tell us much about populist politics, the rise of the global working class outside the global North and the nature of global capitalist exploitation more generally. In addition, this agenda serves as an important point of departure from the dominant middle class focus of research in postsocialism.

show abstract

“…Nor was the Khrushchevian approach consistently liberal; the early 1960s witnessed a crackdown. 33 While these studies of gulag release and regime engagement with dissent draw in part on memoirs and interviews, their main sources are archival, and it is not accidental that these subjects were not tackled in the era prior to archival access. To begin, it may have been necessary to have archive-based studies of the gulag itself before scholars would be ready to tackle its undoing.…”

Section: Reflections and Extensions: Related Recent And Current Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“… Gorlizki, "Theft under Stalin,[32][33], based on documents reprinted in Istoriia Stalinskogo gulaga 1: sec. 7.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding the History of Soviet Criminal Justice: The Contribution of Archives and Other Sources

Solomon

2015

The Russian Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

On the basis of the author's research (and to a lesser extent that of other scholars), this paper argues that for constructing the history of Soviet criminal justice archives served mainly as a supplement to rather than substitute for printed sources and oral history. Archives were more important for the postwar decade, 1946–55, when the quality of printed sources reached a low point. Overall, archival sources provided special insights into decision‐making in criminal policy and the role of Stalin; statistics on the work of the justice agencies (including campaigns and the implementation of new laws); secret laws and decrees; and documents on the management of the penal system. Major findings to which archival sources contributed include the difficulties implementing extreme measures initiated by Stalin (extensions of the law and severe punishments) because of resistance of officials to them; the abandonment in the mid‐1930s of the practice of running legal institutions with uneducated trustees in favor of trained legal officials making careers and the way their work came to be evaluated; the extent of dysfunctions in the administration of justice before Stalin's death; and the seriousness of attempts at reform in the first years of Khrushchev's rule.

show abstract

Protest, Reform and Repression in Khrushchev's Soviet Union

Cited by 44 publications

References 0 publications

Socialization, Rationality, and Age: Generational Gaps and the Attitudes toward the Chechen War in Russia

Socialization, Rationality, and Age: Generational Gaps and the Attitudes toward the Chechen War in Russia

An agenda for research on work and class in the postsocialist world

Understanding the History of Soviet Criminal Justice: The Contribution of Archives and Other Sources

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About