逃离苏维埃人的阴影

IF 1.1 4区 社会学 Q3 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS Communist and Post-Communist Studies Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI:10.1525/cpcs.2023.1817401
Matthew Blackburn, Daria Khlevnyuk
{"title":"逃离苏维埃人的阴影","authors":"Matthew Blackburn, Daria Khlevnyuk","doi":"10.1525/cpcs.2023.1817401","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"It is often asserted that the values and attitudes of Homo Sovieticus, marked in the rising “popularity” of Stalin, live on in contemporary Russia, acting as a negative factor in social and political development. This article critiques the argument that attitudes to Stalin reflect unreformed Soviet values and explain Russia’s authoritarian regression and failed modernization. Our critique of this legacy argument has three parts. First, after examining the problematic elements of the Levada Center approach, we offer alternative explanations for understanding quantitative data on Stalin and the repressions. Second, we examine interview data showing that, for those with a pro-Stalin position, “defending Stalin” is only a small part of a broader worldview that is not obviously part of a “Soviet legacy.” Third, we consider survey data from the trudnaia-pamiat’ project and find common reluctance to discuss much of the Stalinist past, which we argue represents an agonistic stance. Thus, we interpret attitudes to Stalin within a broader context of complex social and cultural transformation where the anomie of the 1990s has been replaced with dynamics toward a more positive identity construct. On the one hand, the antagonistic mode of memory is visible in statist and patriotic discourses, which do not seriously revolve around Stalin but do resist strong criticism of him. On the other hand, we find many more in Russia avoid the Stalin question and adopt an agonistic mode, avoiding conflict through a “de-politicized” version of history.","PeriodicalId":51623,"journal":{"name":"Communist and Post-Communist Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Escaping the Long Shadow of Homo Sovieticus\",\"authors\":\"Matthew Blackburn, Daria Khlevnyuk\",\"doi\":\"10.1525/cpcs.2023.1817401\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"It is often asserted that the values and attitudes of Homo Sovieticus, marked in the rising “popularity” of Stalin, live on in contemporary Russia, acting as a negative factor in social and political development. This article critiques the argument that attitudes to Stalin reflect unreformed Soviet values and explain Russia’s authoritarian regression and failed modernization. Our critique of this legacy argument has three parts. First, after examining the problematic elements of the Levada Center approach, we offer alternative explanations for understanding quantitative data on Stalin and the repressions. Second, we examine interview data showing that, for those with a pro-Stalin position, “defending Stalin” is only a small part of a broader worldview that is not obviously part of a “Soviet legacy.” Third, we consider survey data from the trudnaia-pamiat’ project and find common reluctance to discuss much of the Stalinist past, which we argue represents an agonistic stance. Thus, we interpret attitudes to Stalin within a broader context of complex social and cultural transformation where the anomie of the 1990s has been replaced with dynamics toward a more positive identity construct. On the one hand, the antagonistic mode of memory is visible in statist and patriotic discourses, which do not seriously revolve around Stalin but do resist strong criticism of him. On the other hand, we find many more in Russia avoid the Stalin question and adopt an agonistic mode, avoiding conflict through a “de-politicized” version of history.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51623,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Communist and Post-Communist Studies\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Communist and Post-Communist Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1525/cpcs.2023.1817401\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Communist and Post-Communist Studies","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1525/cpcs.2023.1817401","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

人们经常断言,以斯大林日益“受欢迎”为标志的苏维埃人的价值观和态度,在当代俄罗斯仍然存在,成为社会和政治发展的负面因素。这篇文章批评了对斯大林的态度反映了未改革的苏联价值观,并解释了俄罗斯的专制倒退和现代化失败的论点。我们对这种遗产论的批判有三个部分。首先,在考察了列瓦达中心方法的问题要素之后,我们为理解斯大林和镇压的定量数据提供了另一种解释。其次,我们研究了采访数据,结果显示,对于那些持亲斯大林立场的人来说,“捍卫斯大林”只是一个更广泛世界观的一小部分,而这个世界观显然不是“苏联遗产”的一部分。第三,我们考虑了trudnaia-pamiat项目的调查数据,发现人们普遍不愿讨论斯大林主义的过去,我们认为这代表了一种对立的立场。因此,我们在一个复杂的社会和文化转型的更广泛背景下解释对斯大林的态度,在这个背景下,20世纪90年代的失态已经被朝着更积极的身份结构的动态所取代。一方面,这种对抗性的记忆模式在国家主义和爱国主义话语中是可见的,这些话语并没有严肃地围绕斯大林展开,而是抵制对他的强烈批评。另一方面,我们发现在俄罗斯有更多的人回避斯大林问题,采取一种对抗的模式,通过“去政治化”的历史版本来避免冲突。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Escaping the Long Shadow of Homo Sovieticus
It is often asserted that the values and attitudes of Homo Sovieticus, marked in the rising “popularity” of Stalin, live on in contemporary Russia, acting as a negative factor in social and political development. This article critiques the argument that attitudes to Stalin reflect unreformed Soviet values and explain Russia’s authoritarian regression and failed modernization. Our critique of this legacy argument has three parts. First, after examining the problematic elements of the Levada Center approach, we offer alternative explanations for understanding quantitative data on Stalin and the repressions. Second, we examine interview data showing that, for those with a pro-Stalin position, “defending Stalin” is only a small part of a broader worldview that is not obviously part of a “Soviet legacy.” Third, we consider survey data from the trudnaia-pamiat’ project and find common reluctance to discuss much of the Stalinist past, which we argue represents an agonistic stance. Thus, we interpret attitudes to Stalin within a broader context of complex social and cultural transformation where the anomie of the 1990s has been replaced with dynamics toward a more positive identity construct. On the one hand, the antagonistic mode of memory is visible in statist and patriotic discourses, which do not seriously revolve around Stalin but do resist strong criticism of him. On the other hand, we find many more in Russia avoid the Stalin question and adopt an agonistic mode, avoiding conflict through a “de-politicized” version of history.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
23
期刊介绍: Communist and Post-Communist Studies is an international journal covering all communist and post-communist states and communist movements, including both their domestic policies and their international relations. It is focused on the analysis of historical as well as current developments in the communist and post-communist world, including ideology, economy and society. It also aims to provide comparative foci on a given subject by inviting comments of a comparative character from scholars specializing in the same subject matter but in different countries.
期刊最新文献
Introduction to the Special Issue on Protest and Authoritarian Reaction in Belarus Emotional Splits and Psychologization Securitization in the Shadow of Armed Conflict Measuring Civil Society Socialist Egalitarianism in Everyday Life of Secondary Technical Schools in Czechoslovakia during the Normalization Period (1969–89)
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1