scholarly journals La crise du socialisme réellement existant

2005 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 283-304
Author(s):  
David Mandel

The Soviet Union and its East European glacis are experiencing their second major wave of crisis since the death of Stalin. But unlike the "de-stalinization" crisis of the second half of the 1950s, which was largely political and was overcome through a combination of repression and reform that left the system basically intact, the present crisis cannot be weathered so easily and threatens to usher in a period of political upheaval, as it has already in Poland and, to some extent, in Romania. On the most obvious level, the crisis manifests itself in the constant decline of the economic growth rate since the late 1950s, which has put an end to the slow but steady rise in living standards, the basis upon which the tacit post-Stalin accord between the bureaucracy and society was founded. The roots of this crisis are deeply structural, but structural reforms, in particular the introduction of the « regulated market mechanism », which appears to be the nly viable alternative open to the bureaucracy, will meet with strong opposition from important sectors of that elite, especially the provincial party bosses, and threaten to create a split in its ranks. At the same time, such a reform is politically unfeasible without important concessions to the working class in the direction of democratization or, at the least, the right to organize into independent trade unions to protect itself against management, whose powers would be greatly enhanced by the reform. But such concessions to the working class, as Poland shows, are perceived by the bureaucracy as a threat to its very existence. At the same time, the working class today is potentially a much more formidable political force than at any time since the civil war. The leadership is, therefore, in a dilemma. The 1980s are likely to see the explosive combination of a simultaneous crisis "as the top" and "at the bottom".

1957 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 55-67 ◽  
Author(s):  
Harold Karan Jacobson

One of the significant structural differences between the organization of economic and social work under the League and under the United Nations is the extent to which non-governmental organizations (NGO's) have been allowed to participate. NGO's have been granted far greater privileges in the UN than they enjoyed in the League. Initially, they were formally recognized in Article 71 of the Charter, which gives the Economic and Social Council the right to make “suitable arrangements” for consultation with them. While defined in differing ways during different periods, consultative status under this article has, subject to various conditions, always included the right to participate in the debates of ECOSOC, its commissions and committees, and to propose items for inclusion in their provisional agenda. NGO's have made extensive use of these privileges. Their use, however, as well as the entire record of NGO action in the UN, has been inseparably linked with the cold war. Russian demands at San Francisco for privileges for the newly created, communist-controlled World Federation of Trade Unions (WFTU) were a contributing factor in the decision to include Article 71 in the Charter. The initial definition of this article resulted primarily from the interaction of pressures by the Soviet Union and the WFTU and the western response.


1981 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 105-116
Author(s):  
Wolfgang Schlauch

Since the signing of the Final Act of the Conference on Security in Europe (CSCE) in Helsinki on August 1, 1975, the communist parties of Eastern Europe have been confronted with growing human rights movements from diverse individuals and groups. In the Soviet Union, so-called Helsinki Watch Committees were founded in 1976, in order to monitor the implementation of the Helsinki human rights provisions and those of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights. In Czechoslovakia, the human rights movement was coordinated by the publication of “Charter 77” in January 1977, which, like its counterpart in the Soviet Union, asked its government to comply with the Helsinki human rights provisions signed earlier by the Prague government. “Charter 77” has been signed by more than a thousand individuals, many of whom have been arrested or terrorized by the Secret Police. In Poland, the “Committee for the Defense of the Workers” (KOR) was founded after the June 1976 uprising of Polish workers in Ursus and Radom. The Committee's purpose was to provide legal and financial aid to those workers subjected to the Party's repression and physical terror for having participated in the June uprisings. KOR also criticized the government's violation of fundamental rights, such as the right to work, freedom of expression, and the right to participate in meetings and demonstrations. Again in 1980 during the Polish workers’ strikes, KOR under the leadership of Jacek Kuron assisted the strikers. They denounced the decline of the Polish Communist Party's credibility and the complete collapse of communication between rulers and the ruled. Even Hungary and Rumania have experienced the emergence of individuals and small groups who either want their governments to observe the human rights provisions, or who support human rights movements in other eastern European countries.


2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 49-60
Author(s):  
Alessandro Figus ◽  
Andrea Pisaniello ◽  
Stefano Mustica

Abstract “Ostalgie” is coming from a German word referring to nostalgia for aspects of life in East Germany, and not only. It is a new multipurpose and new expression related the German terms “Nostalgie” (nostalgia in Italian) and Ost (East). Its anglicised equivalent, ostalgia, it is rhyming with “nostalgia” and it is also sometimes used. The collapse of Soviet Union and the Berlin Wall destruction, was the concept protected concrete barrier that physically and ideologically divided Berlin from ‘61 to ’89, It especially divided West and East European countries, the wall cut off West Berlin from almost all of surrounding East Germany and East Berlin until government officials opened it in November 1989. Formally its demolition began on 13 June 1990 and finished in 1992 and coincides in some generation from the Warsaw Pact countries, legally the Treaty of Friendship, Cooperation with the “Mutual Assistance” URSS of the birth of “ostalgie”, that it goes against with modern principle of multicultural society and globalisation of the world. At the eighth congress of the communist party Lenin recognized the right to self-determination of the populations of the empire and promised them significant concessions, although its final intent was to reach the true dictatorship of the proletariat which would have rendered the ethnic-national distinctions useless. The Soviet Union became the incubator of new nations with the dissolving of the Russian nation in the Soviet state. Does the “ostalgie” refer to the USSR, is this compatible with multiculturalism? Is it compatible with that plurality of tending different cultures that coexists in mutual respect and which implies the preservation of their specific traits by rejecting any type of homologation or fusion in the dominant culture?


2018 ◽  
pp. 550-563
Author(s):  
Daniel Sawert ◽  

The article assesses archival materials on the festival movement in the Soviet Union in 1950s, including its peak, the 6th World Festival of Youth and Students held in 1957 in Moscow. Even now the Moscow festival is seen in the context of international cultural politics of the Cold War and as a unique event for the Soviet Union. The article is to put the 6th World Festival of Youth and Students in the context of other youth festivals held in the Soviet Union. The festivals of 1950s provided a field for political, social, and cultural experiments. They also have been the crucible of a new way of communication and a new language of design. Furthermore, festivals reflected the new (althogh relative) liberalism in the Soviet Union. This liberalism, first of all, was expressed in the fact that festivals were organized by the Komsomol and other Soviet public and cultural organisations. Taking the role of these organisations into consideration, the research draws on the documents of the Ministry of culture, the All-Russian Stage Society, as well as personal documents of the artists. Furthermore, the author has gained access to new archive materials, which have until now been part of no research, such as documents of the N. Krupskaya Central Culture and Art Center and of the central committees of various artistic trade unions. These documents confirm the hypothesis that the festivals provided the Komsomol and the Communist party with a means to solve various social, educational, and cultural problems. For instance, in Central Asia with its partiarchal society, the festivals focuced on female emancipation. In rural Central Asia, as well as in other non-russian parts of the Soviet Union, there co-existed different ways of celebrating. Local traditions intermingled with cultural standards prescribed by Moscow. At the first glance, the modernisation of the Soviet society was succesful. The youth acquired political and cultural level that allowed the Soviet state to compete with the West during the 6th World Festival of Youth and Students. During the festival, however, it became apparent, that the Soviet cultural scheme no longer met the dictates of times. Archival documents show that after the Festival cultural and party officials agreed to ease off dogmatism and to tolerate some of the foreign cultural phenomena.


1983 ◽  
Vol 37 (1) ◽  
pp. 143-155 ◽  
Author(s):  
William M. Reisinger

In late November 1978, Nicolae Ceausescu, general secretary of the Romanian Communist Party, returned to Bucharest from a Moscow meeting of the Warsaw Treaty Organization (WTO). In a series of speeches from 25 November through 1 December, he began to denounce efforts by the Soviet Union to integrate more fully the armies of the WTO members and to get the East European members to increase their defense expenditures. Ceausescu was making a dramatic (and apparently successful) appeal for domestic support for his resistance to Soviet pressure. Other WTO member-states, although less publicly, have also resisted this Soviet pressure. Romania is not the only East European state ignoring Soviet calls for higher defense spending. Poland, for example, has also shown a significant decline during the 1970s in the amount of its gross national product (GNP) spent on defense (D/GNP). East Germany, on the other hand, increased its expenditures dramatically over the same decade.


Author(s):  
Yu.P. Shchukina

Background. Today, analyzing the Ukrainian theatrical movement of the first half of XX century, we can’t bypass V. Morskoy’s critical legacy. Volodimir Saveliyovich Morskoy (the real name – Vulf Mordkovich) is one of the providing Ukrainian theatrical and film critics of the first half of the XX century. He left us his always argumentative, but sometimes contradictious evaluations of dramatic art masters: the directors of Kharkiv Ukrainian drama theatre “Berezil” (from 1935 it named after T. Shevchenko) L. Kurbas, B. Tyagno, L. Dubovik, Yu. Bortnik, V. Inkizhinov, M. Krushelnitsky, M. Osherovsky; the producers of Kharkiv Russian drama theatre named after A. Pushkin – O. Kramov, V. Aristov, V. Nelli-Vlad and many others. Due to the critic’s persecution by the repressive machine of USSR, his evaluations of theatrical process were not quoted in soviet time researches. They still were not entered to the professional usage, were not published and commented in the whole capacity. Methods and novelty of the research. The research methodology joints the historical, typological, comparative, textual, biographical methods. The first researcher, who made up incomplete description of the bibliography of dramatic criticism by V. Morskoy, became Kharkiv’s bibliographer Tetyana Bakhmet. She gave maximally full list of critic articles (more than eighty positions) for the 1924, 1926–1929, 1937, 1948–1949 years. Kharkiv’s theater scientist Ya. Partola [16] in the first encyclopedic edition, that contains the article about V. Morskiy, gave the description of the only publication by critic known for today, in Moscow newspaper “Izvestiya”. Forty six critical articles, half of which didn’t note in bibliographies of both scientists, were collected and analyzed in periodical funds of Kharkiv V. Korolenko Central Scientific Library by the author of this article. Objectives. V. Morskoy was writing the reviews about the new films; the programs of popular and philharmonic performers; was researching the musical theater. This article has the purpose to characterize the features of V. Morskoy’ critical reviews on the dramatic theater performances. Results. It was managed to find out the articles by V. Morskoy hidden for the cryptonym “Vl. M.”, which dedicated to the performances of the “Berezil” theater of the second half of 1920th: “Jacquery”, “Yoot”, “Sedi“. The critic wrote about the setting “Jacquery ” by director V. Tyahno : “Berezil in setting of ‘Jacquery’ emphases it’s ideology, approaching ‘Jacquery’ to nowadays viewer” [2]. Perceiving critically some objective features of avant-garde stylistic, such as cinema techniques, V. Morskoy remarks: “The pictures are discrete, too short, some of them are lasting for 2–3 minutes, they made cinematographically” [2]. In the same time, the young critic already demonstrates the feeling and flair to the understanding of acting art. So, he accurately pointed out the first magnitude actors from the “Berezil” ensemble: A. Buchma, Yo. Ghirnyak, M. Krushelnitsky, B. Balaban [2]. V. Morskoy connected his view to “Jacquery” with the tendency of the second half of the 1920th: “For recently the left theaters became notably more right, and the right one – more left”[2], that reveals his theatrical experience. His contemporaries due to the author’s sense of humor easily recognized the style of V. Morsky’s reviews. Critical irony passes through the his essay about the setting by director V. Sukhodolskiy “Ustim Karmelyuk” in the Working Youth Theatre: “Focusing attention to Karmelyuk, V. Sukhodolskiy left the peoples in shade. Often they keep silence – and not in the Pushkin sense “[14]. Despite on the “alive” style, one of the features of V. Morskoy journalism was adherence to principles. His human courage deserves a high evaluation. In 1940, after the three years after the exile of Les Kurbas, the leader director of “Berezil” Theater, to Solovki, the critic published in the professional magazine the creative portrait of this disgraced director’s wife – the actress Valentina Chistyakova [15]. V. Morskoy arguments on the relationship between the modern works and the tradition of prominent predecessors has always been ably dissolved in an analysis of a performance. Each time V. Morskoy was paying attention to the distinctions of principals of playwriting, stage direction and even creative schools, in the second half of 1930th – 1940th, when the words “stage direction”, “currents”, in condition of predomination the so-called “social realism” method, in the soviet newspapers practically were not mentioning. For example, the critic saw of realistically-psychological directions in the O. Kramov’s performance “Year 1919”[9]. In 1940, V. Morskoy made a review of the performance of the then Zaporizhhya theater named after M. Zankovetska “In the steppes of Ukraine”, insisting on the continuity of the comedies of O. Korniychuk in relation to the works of Gogol and others of playwrights-coryphaeuses: “The play of O. Korniychuk is characterized by profound national form...” [7]. However, in the fact that in the Soviet Union at that time reigned as the doctrine the methodology of the “socialist realism”, the tragedy of honest criticism comprised. In controversy with the critic O. Harkivianin, V. Morskoy expressed the credo about the ethics and fighting qualities of the reviewer: “Apparently, Ol. Kharkivianin belongs to the category of peoples, who see the task of critic in order to give only the positive assessments. The vulgar sociological approach to the phenomena of art could be remaining the personal mistake of Ol. Kharkivianin. But when he presents him as the most important argument, everyone becomes uncomfortable”[8]. In 1949, the political regime fabricated the case of a “bourgeois cosmopolitan” against the honest theatrical critic and accused him in betraying of public interests adjudged V. Morskoy to untimed death at a concentration camp (Ivdellag, 1952). However, the time arbitrated this long discussion in favor of V. Morskoy. Conclusions. For the objective analysis of theater life of the city and the country as a whole, it is imperative to draw from the historical facts contained in the reviews of V. Morskoy, and the methodology of the review while investigating studies of theatrical art and theatrical thought of 1920–1940th. Thus, the gathering of the full kit of the critical observations of the famous Kharkov theater expert of the first half of the XX century is the important task for further researchers.


Author(s):  
Ivan Gololobov

This chapter discusses the evolution of punk in Russia since its inception at the end of the 1970s. It pays particular attention to the changing perception of class belonging and the political engagement of the punk scene in Russia. Whereas in the West punk was a political movement closely associated with its working-class background, in the Soviet Union it emerged as a protest of middle-class intellectuals fighting for the right to be different and to stand out from the uniformed workers’ and peasants’ collective. This defined the particular stand of early Russian punk toward the genre’s social engagement and political appeal. Working-classness and political commitment—initial conditions of punk identity in the West—became something early Russian punk was positioned against. The dramatic transformation of Russian society over the following decades inevitably affected the cultural ideology of Russian punk, and from the 1990s onward it had to find its place and defend its significant difference amid the realities of “wild” neoliberal capitalism. The chapter shows how in Russia punk evolved from being a highly individualistic and apolitical practice to one of the most radical and politically committed scenes, closely affiliated with other struggles on the Left.


Author(s):  
Kyle Burke

The Iran-Contra scandal halted much of these paramilitary campaigns in the late 1980s. That was because it required many of the most important actors, John Singlaub among them, to spend much of their time testifying in Congress and preparing legal defenses, rather than working overseas. Within a few years, the collapse of the Soviet Union made the anticommunist international obsolete. Still, the ideas and impulses that had animated it lived on. Those legacies were most evident in the rise of the private military firms abroad and the radicalization of the right-wing paramilitaries at home.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document