Suchergebnisse

Цель. В статье рассматриваются большевизм и сталинизм через влияние политических, социальных и исторических условий и факторов на преемственность и разрыв в их взаимосвязи. Методы. Ретроспективный анализ использует системно-генетический метод в исследовании причин возникновения сталинизма, структурно-функциональный метод в обосновании их единства, социокультурную методологию в изучении перехода от большевизма к сталинизму. Применяются принципы историзма и диалектики. Результаты. Исследованы конкретно-исторические механизмы порождения большевизмом сталинизма, различия между «старым» и «новым» большевизмом, парадоксы сталинизма как выражения природы Октябрьской революции. Научная новизна. Раскрыта преемственность большевизма и сталинизма в организации внутрипартийной жизни и разрыв между ними в качественном составе партии и идеологических ориентирах. ; Purpose. This article discusses Bolshevism and Stalinism through the influence of political, social and historical conditions and factors of continuity and rupture in their relationship. Methods. Retrospective analysis uses a system-genetic method in the study of the causes of Stalinism, structural-functional method to justify their unity, sociocultural-methodology in the study of the transition from Bolshevism to Stalinism. Principles of historical dialectical studies. Results. Specific historical mechanisms of Bolshevism of Stalinism development, the distinction between «old» and «new» Bolshevism, Stalinism paradoxes as an expression of the nature of the October revolution were studied. Scientific novelty. The continuity of Bolshevism and Stalinism in the organization of inner party life and their quality gap in the party and ideological orientations were disclosed.

SUMMARY:
The Bolsheviks dreamed of homogeneous orders. The cultural diversity of the Russian Empire, though, stood in stark contrast to their dreams of certainty. The Bolsheviks believed the Empire's multi-ethnicity to be a threat to their revolutionary project – nevertheless, in the 1920s, they transformed the Soviet Union into a state of nations, that is, in which newly created nations were assigned to national territories. Why did the Bolsheviks, who sought to overcome diversity, create national distinctions? Because national orders were not only a means of simplifying and categorizing a world alien to them, but also because Stalin and his followers – members of ethnic minorities who came from the periphery of the Empire and had experienced inter-ethnic conflict – could not imagine people without national ties. Thus, the state-building process turned into an imperial project, remodeling the multiethnic Empire into a nation-state and ascribing everlasting qualities to ethnic groups and cultures. And while the Bolsheviks talked about overcoming distinctions, they were simultaneously and unremittingly reproducing them. It is this contradiction between the rhetoric of certainty and the incessant staging of differences that the Stalinist terror stems from. The ethnic deportations of the 1930s and 1940s and the "National Operations" during the Great Terror 1937/38 were the results of excessive nationalization – for when the subjects did not submit to collectivization and the Cultural Revolution, the Bolsheviks took it as national resistance. Stalin and followers, obsessed with ideas of foreign spies and saboteurs, came to believe that nations could pose a threat to the Soviet order, resulting in terror against ethnic collectives that were deemed unreliable. In the 1930s, one's nationality became one's fate, since every man could become a victim of terror if the ethnic collective to which he belonged was declared an enemy nation. Thus, the historical place of Stalinism was the Empire.

Сообщение посвящено актуальным политическим вопросам. Сообщение публикуется в рамках проекта «Диалоги о политике: российско-американские студенческие семинары, Тамбов (РФ) - Клемсон (США) (ТГУ им. Г.Р. Державина, 2005-2006 гг.)" ; The report is devoted to current political issues. The report is published in the framework of the "Dialogs about politics: the Russian-American student seminars", Tambov (Russia) Clemson (USA) (Tambov State University, 2005-2006).

Осуществляется критический анализ предложенной И. М. Вельмом и В. В. Алексеевым интерпретации научных и политических взглядов А. А. Богданова, называемой авторами «концепцией социально-организованного опыта (СОО)». Рассмотрены предложенные этими авторами методологические и источниковедческие аспекты формирования их позиции в контексте развития мировой и российской общественно-политической мысли XX в. Доказывается недостаточная аргументированность позиций И. М. Вельма и В. В. Алексеева относительно связи между «концепцией СОО» и действительными научными взглядами А. А. Богданова. ; This article contains critical analysis of Alexander Bogdanov's scientific theories' and political positions' interpretation formulated by I. M. Velm and V. V. Alekseev in historical monography called "Stalinism". Methodological and source-studying aspects of Velm's and Alekseev's views are considered in a context of world and Russian political mind of XXth century. Yu.V.Kupert and A. V. Lutsenko made analysis of extremely versatile proofs' base which offered by I. M. Velm and V. V. Alekseev for acknowledgement of their research basic hypothesis about genetic relations between "social-organized experience (SOE) concept" with Alexander Bogdanov's scientific and political views, on the one hand, and social and political practice of Stalin's Soviet Union, on the other hand. I. M. Velm and V. V. Alekseev are thinking that the "SOE concept" is concentrating Bogdanov's political philosophy and practice. This concept is based on the idea of allocation the special figure of personal organizer from the society. Organizer concentrates in his hands the power over all parties and branches of social life, including ideology. Velm and Alekseev are writing that organizer's role in Soviet history was taken by Stalin whose political practice is presented in critically-publicistic style. The given feature of the sights statement of I. M. Velm and V. V. Alekseev is estimated by Yu.V. Kupert and A. V. Lutsenko from the scientific research methodology point of view and also from the source study analysis quality point of view. For this reason the special attention in the article is directed at the specific "additional sence method" used by I. M. Velm and V. V. Alekseev for original interpretation of Bogdanov's views. Russian Marxist scientist and revolutionary is shown by Velm and Alekseev as "dark hero" who made for Stalin the totalitarian ideology on "SOE concept" base and who worked very hard for introducing this ideology into Soviet society life. For acknowledgement of this thesis I. M. Velm and V. V. Alekseev are broadly interpreting the involved materials (Bogdanov's texts, their critical analysis in works of V. I. Lenin and other contemporaries of the scientist), and they put in these used works their own sense which not always coincides with a position of primary sources authors. All materials of "Stalinism" are grouping not on their genetic relation, but on the basis of the emotionally-shaped associations, and it is methologically doubtful as attribute of belletristic literature, not of scientific research. Yu.V.Kupert and A. V. Lutsenko proved insufficient argumentation to position of I. M. Velm and V. V. Alekseev concerning communication between "SOE concept" and Bogdanov's scientific views.

На основе материалов Государственного архива Днепропетровской области в статье рассматривается проблема реабилитации жертв сталинизму в Украине. Её первый этап связан с хрущевской «оттепелью», когда выборочная реабилитация представлялась единым способом отказа от политики террора. В этот период была прекращена практика массовых репрессий, но сама политическая система осталась практически нетронутой. ; The problem of rehabilitation was analyzed in the article. It's first stage was connected with Krushchev's «thaw», when politics of the mass repression was finished, but the authoritarian system remained unchanged.

Дается обзор постсоветской историографии, посвященной проблеме уголовного преследования граждан СССР по политическим мотивам в предвоенный и военный периоды (1939-1945 гг.). Проанализированы основные теоретические проблемы политических репрессий в СССР 1939-1945 гг., к которым обращались современные сибирские историки ; The review of the post-Soviet Siberian historiography to the devoted problem of criminal prosecution of citizens of the USSR on political grounds during the pre-war and war-time periods (1939-1945) is given. The basic theoretical problems of political repressions in the USSR are analysed 1939-1945 in publications of modern Siberian historians.

В статье представлен обзор современной отечественной историографии, посвященной следующим дискуссионным проблемам: определение информативной возможности и исторической достоверности архивных данных по различным аспектам политических репрессий в СССР (1928-1953 гг.) и основные оценки последствий репрессивной политики. ; The article gives a review of modern Russian historiography devoted to the following debatable problems: detection of an informative opportunity and historical reliability of archival data on various aspects of political repressions (1928-1953 years) in the USSR and the basic estimations of repressive politics consequences.

Анализируются факторы и детерминант, стимулирующие формирование советской научно-технической политики во второй половине 1940-х начале 1950-х гг., а также проводится характеристика «протополитики» в отношении отечественного научно-технического комплекса в экономическом, идеологическом и организационном аспектах. Особое внимание уделяется трансформациям в системе организации и управления наукой, выделены «точки роста», артикулированы значение и роль в этом процессе организационного опыта, накопленного в военно-технической сфере. ; After the end of the WWII science policy as a system set of goals and tasks directed on utilisation of science products for implementing state priorities, and actions focused on their achievement was de facto missing in the country with the exception of key defence tasks where application of research was more systematic. Science and technology development was determined by a combination of specific branch politics which were often based on different conceptual platforms and did not have a fundamental science background. Basic research, contrary to equipment production and technology, did not belong to the state priorities up to the middle of 1950s. Meanwhile, the analysis of the political process and existing practices allows outlining some markers of science 'proto-policy'. Three elements/ aspects are basically used for structuring such an analysis these are economic, ideological and organisational aspects. After the end of the war changes in the economic elements of science policy included some increase of funding and, specifically, substantial rise of salaries of scientists. In addition to that, the principle of overwhelming state planning was extended to science and technology. Ideological aspects of science 'proto-policy' fully reflected contradictions and conflicts of the epoch and negatively impacted the sphere of science. Ideological campaigns hampered the development of science, distorted the natural logics of evolution of knowledge, changed psychological climate and atmosphere in the scientific community and stimulated penetration of bureaucratic principles of management to science. In organisational respect science was not yet considered as an integrated subject of management and that was reflected in the administration structure since there was not a single state body responsible for research. In the meantime, substantial transformations in organization of military science started as early as in the years of the WWII. They were based on change of accents referring to science in favour of setting up there a full cycle 'research-equipment-technology-production' which later impacted both military and civilian sectors of economics. The experience of R&D coordination in the sphere of military technology, although accessible to a very limited number of people, was very meaningful for the development of science and technology as a whole. Evidently, it demonstrated the necessity of introduction of a single science and technology cycle and elaboration of not merely a technological policy, but rather of a science and technology policy for the solution of the most important military and economic tasks. This, however, became a peculiarity of the next historical period.

В статье анализируются особенности влияния идеологии сталинизма на представления советских исследователей экономической истории России начала XX в. на протяжении 1930-х годов. На большом массиве архивных и опубликованных источников показано, что это влияние обеспечивалось структурами политической власти и научными учреждениями. ; In the article there is an analysis of specific features of the influence of Stalinist ideology on views of soviet researches of economical history of Russia at the beginning of 20th c. during the 1930s. On the basis of big volume of archival and published sources it was shown that such influence was organized by the structures of political power and the scientific institutions.

Статья посвящена методологическому анализу политических взглядов и учения А.А. Зиновьева, актуальность которых возросла в условиях смены политического курса России после распада Советского Союза и попытки построения демократического общества ; The article is about methodological analysis of political views and study of A. A. Zinoviev, which became actual due to the change of Russian political course after the disintegration of the USSR and the attempt of building a democratic society

Рассматриваются социальные характеристики репрессированных в годы Большого террора в Карельской АССР. Основным источником исследования являются местные Книги Памяти, в электронном виде вошедшие в базу данных «Жертвы политического террора в СССР». Выделены три основные национальные группы репрессированных (русские, карелы и финны), аресты каждой из которых имели собственную динамику. Установлено, что в основном от репрессий пострадали люди в возрасте 31-40 лет (33%), преимущественно мужчины (95%). ; The paper analyzes the social portrait of the Great Terror victims (July 1937 November 1938) in the Karelian Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic (KASSR) and compares it with the social features of the victims from other regions of the USSR. The main source of the research is a large-scale database "The victims of the political terror in the USSR", which includes more than 2.6 million short biographies. It was collected by International Memorial Society. The database is compiled on the material of the so-called "Books of Memory" (or "Memorial Books"). There are 10872 short biographies of the Great Terror victims in the Karelian ASSR in the database and information about all the victims. The repressions in Karelia were of a large-scale compared to other regions due to its boundary position and some other factors, including big Finnish population. 85% of the arrested persons in the region were executed, compared to 43% in the whole USSR. The dynamics of the arrests and convictions of the "offenders" in 1937-1938 is analyzed. The author concludes that the arrests started actively in August 1937 from the arrests of Russians and Karelians. The most severe arrests of Finns were held in 1938. The average age and gender of the repressed people is also analyzed. The victims were predominantly male (about 95%), which meant that women had lower social status. The victims were mostly in their thirties (33%) and forties (26%). The conclusions about victims' nationalities are made. By the 1937 census, the Karelian population consisted of 63% Russians, 22% Karelians and 3% Finns. But there were 34% Russians, 27% Karelians and 22% Finns among the arrested persons. Mass arrests of Finns started in November 1937 after the approval of the measure by the central authorities. They were sentenced to death more frequently than Russians in 87% of the cases compared to 78% of Russians. People of other foreign nationalities such as Germans and Poles were sentenced to capital punishment in 90% of the cases.

На материалах разнообразных документов (писем советских людей в официальные инстанции, частной корреспонденции, анекдотов, частушек) автор, отметив наличие разных мнений современников вождя, рассматривает их отрицательное отношение к социальной политике, ликвидации демократии в партии и государстве, к политическим репрессиям, инициатором которых они считали именно И. Сталина. ; Using different documents (such as Soviet citizens' letters to official bodies, private correspondence, anecdotes, couplets), the author notes that the leader's contemporaries had different opinions and showed their negative attitude to the social policy, elimination of democracy in the party and in the state, and political repressions, which, in their opinion, were initiated by Stalin.

Рассматривается проблема вмешательства советского государства в семейную жизнь спецпоселенцев в послевоенный период. Анализируются подходы политического руководства страны и руководителей разных подразделений НКВД – МВД – МГБ к решению вопроса воссоединения семей спецпоселенцев. Раскрывается, каким образом официальное лишение спецпоселенцев свободы передвижения вызывало полуофициальное и неофициальное ограничение прав, в частности, права на семейную жизнь. ; The essay analyses the problem of the authorities' interruption into family life of so called special exiles in the postwar period. The approaches of the Soviet leaders and the heads of NKVD structures to the problem of special exiles families' reunion are under investigation. The author shows how the official limitation of freedom of movement led to numerous unofficial limitations of special exiles' rights, particularly their right for family life. The comparison of official status of special exiles and their factual status allows to recognize a cryptic nature of the Soviet totalitarian state. The author demonstrates the gap between formal rights of special exiles and their real discrimination, and pays attention to different unofficial barriers which regulated exiles' life. The author argues that an individual did not have any value for the Soviet political leaders as well as for local officials.

Рассматривается роль Высшей аттестационной комиссии (ВАК) в проблеме обеспечения научно-техническими кадрами научных и высших учебных учреждений в эпоху сталинской модернизации довоенного периода, анализируется трансформация структуры системы аттестации научных и научно-педагогических кадров, устанавливается соотношение идеологического и научно-практического компонентов в работе членов ВАК. Автор приходит к выводу, что для советской системы аттестации научно-педагогических кадров в первые годы ее существования не была характерна строго централизованная структура, которая начала формироваться во второй половине 1930-х гг. В период 1933-1935 гг. в ее функционировании заметным было присутствие общественно-научного компонента, отсутствовала и явно выраженная функция идеологического контроля за наукой, уступая место практической задаче обеспечения научных и высших учебных заведений необходимыми специалистами. ; The article deals with the Soviet system of attestation of scientific and scientific-pedagogical staff of pre-war period through the activities of the Higher Attestation Commission (abbreviated as VAK), which was established in 1933 and controlled the awarding of advanced academic degrees and academic ranks in all of the USSR. This revising of VAK history is caused by the topicality of its modernization. Presently West European model of attestation is being extensively discussed in Russian society as more effective and democratic compared with currently existing. We think Soviet experience also deserves to be more carefully examined as a further alternative. The reviewed material has lead to the conclusion that the Soviet system of attestation of scientific and scientific-pedagogical personnel staff was not used as some kind of tool of "totalitarian" regime of Stalinism at the initial stage of its existence. That trend began to appear since 1936. With regard to period of 1933-1936 years we can consider the system of attestation as a rather democratic model. That also can be referred towards the Soviet science of that period when scientists actively published their scientific articles in international journals and made foreign scientific work trips. During the short period of 1933-1935 years the presence of public and scientific component was notable in the functioning of the attestation system. At that period of time the right of assignment of a number of titles and degrees was granted to councils of higher education institutions and research institutions either completely independently or with the approval of the qualification commissions of adequate People's Commissariats. In this case the Higher Attestation Commission acted as the highest court of cassation, and did not participate at first-hand in the process of assigning of titles and degrees except for doctoral degree and professor rank. What should be particularly emphasized is the role as coordinating center that played VAK in the Soviet era, coupling science with industry. VAK detected scarce specialties and aimed to provide the national economy with experts of economic and industrial sections. This feature has been obviously lost by now. As a result, high-tech sectors of the economy did not receive sufficient quantity of specialists, and scientific researches did not find an entry into the national economic market. In this lost peculiarity of VAK the author sees the main advantage of the Soviet system of certification of scientific and scientific-pedagogical personnel of the Soviet period, which was also free from the ideological component in the short period of 1933-1935 years.