Copyright 2012 Maria Galmarini
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Copyright 2012 Maria Galmarini THE “RIGHT TO BE HELPED”: WELFARE POLICIES AND NOTIONS OF RIGHTS AT THE MARGINS OF SOVIET SOCIETY, 1917-1950 BY MARIA GALMARINI DISSERTATION Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in History in the Graduate College of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 2012 Urbana, Illinois Doctoral Committee: Professor Diane Koenker, Chair Professor Mark Steinberg Professor John Randolph Professor Antoinette Burton ii Abstract In this dissertation, I trace the course of ethically founded notions of rights in the Soviet experience from 1917 to 1950, focusing on the “right to be helped” as the entitlement to state assistance felt by four marginalized social groups. Through an analysis of the requests for help written by social activists on behalf of disabled children, blind and deaf adults, single mothers, and political prisoners, I examine the multiple and changing ideas that underlie the defense of this right. I reveal that both the Soviet state authorities and these marginalized social groups tended to reject charity as a form of unwanted condescension. In addition, state organs as well as petitioners applied legal notions of rights arbitrarily and situationally. However, political leaders, social activists, and marginalized citizens themselves engaged in dialogues that ultimately produced a strong, ethically grounded consciousness of rights. What I call “the right to be helped” was a framework of concepts, practices, and feelings that set the terms for what marginalized individuals could imagine and argue in relation to state assistance. As such, the right to be helped fundamentally reflected Soviet understandings of disability, generation, gender, labor merits, and human suffering. Composed of five thematically and case-study based chapters, this dissertation begins with an analysis of Soviet welfare policies towards unemployed and uninsured citizens. Then, it moves to the ways in which four communities of activists implemented these policies and advocated on behalf of their constituents. Throughout the chapters, I pay attention to the forces that shaped help from below by examining how single individuals formulated, sustained, and contested narratives of help in their everyday lives. Within this structure, I analyze evidence coming from a vast archival body and including the administrative correspondence of key ministries, the printed reports and handwritten notes of medical professionals, the archival documents and journal articles produced by Soviet relief organizations, individual petitions and complaints, memoirs and other autobiographical materials. My methodology involves textual close-reading and analysis of cultural practices, but also relies on institutional history and biography. I focus my attention on the semantic significance of concepts and chart their changing social constructions over time. However, I also go beyond the level of representation by exploring the socio-economic and political everyday conditions in which marginalized citizens articulated their claims. iii This dissertation reveals that the state’s criteria for approving requests for help were a blend of merits earned through one’s services to the collective (productive, military, or reproductive) and some sort of personal hardship (disability, loneliness, poverty, old age, or poor health). Disabled children and adults, unmarried mothers, and even political prisoners were entitled to help either by virtue of having given great effort or for having endured huge sacrifices. In either case, the Soviet state conceived their right to be helped as a form of remuneration. For Soviet marginalized individuals, it was a combination of legality, morality, and patronage that defined their right to be helped. Physically, socially, and politically deviant citizens relied on the power of personal patrons, but they also counted on laws and appealed to a shared ethos. While welfare legislation was set in a mesmerizing range of directives and codes, Soviet morality entailed an ensemble of ideas that – when resources were available – could effectively resonate with the targets of petitions for help. These ideas included evaluations of the performance of one’s duties and ideals of humanitarianism vis-à-vis poverty, disease and disability, generation, loneliness, and suffering. In the dialogues between state and non-state actors, all these factors were layered over and filtered through gender and traditional patriarchal visions of the family. iv Acknowledgements Knowingly or unknowingly, many people have contributed to this dissertation and made the process of conceptualizing, researching, and writing it a wonderfully rich experience. These acknowledgements can make justice neither to the serendipitous encounters that changed my thinking in a heartbeat nor to the long friendships that have shaped my ideas over the years. While I always liked reading and writing, I never thought that these activities could become for me something more than small pleasures hardly and eagerly carved out from my everyday life. It was Professor Maria Todorova who strongly encouraged me to believe in my desire to learn. With her encouragement and example, she impacted the course of my professional and personal life in ways that I will always be thankful for. I am very grateful for Maria’s heartfelt support in all the joyful and the difficult moments since I applied to graduate studies at the University of Illinois. When I started my Master in the Russian, East European, and Eurasian Center at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, I entered a completely new, English-speaking environment. Here, I met Professors Diane Koenker and Mark Steinberg, who have since guided me through the rigors of writing history. Their engaging courses and their mentoring illuminated my path as a graduate student. Under their guidance, I learned the art of researching, writing, and revising. More importantly, they strongly encouraged me to go beyond the collection of empirical data and think more broadly and conceptually about the meaning of historical “facts.” The subject of this dissertation was born from the many conversations during which Diane and Mark pushed me to ask larger questions. During my years as graduate student in the History Department at UIUC, I enjoyed attending the exciting seminars taught by Professors John Randolph, Antoinette Burton, Keith Hitchins, Tamara Chaplin, Peter Fritzche, Lillian Hoddeson, Adrian Burgos, and Carol Symes. At the Russian reading group, I learned the art of exchanging ideas, providing feedback, and accepting criticism. Thank you to all its participants! Professors Eugene Avrutin and Behrooz Ghamari-Tabrizi helped me become a better graduate student – I am very grateful for their friendship. As a teaching assistant, I owe my thanks to Professors Harry Liebersohn and Mark Micale, who taught me how to make history enjoyable for undergraduate students. Working as research assistant for Professor Mark Steinberg has allowed me to become a much better scholar. I am also thankful to him and to Jane Hedges for having trusted me as editorial assistant at Slavic v Review. Other members of the History Department, such as Professors Dana Rabin, Craig Koslofsky, and Mark Leff generously gave of their time and attention in the final stages of my graduate studies. The members of my dissertation committee, Professors Koenker, Steinberg, Randolph, and Burton gave me tremendous suggestions every time that they read drafts of my chapters. Their thought-provoking questions at both the pre-defense and the defense will help me transform this dissertation into a successful book. It is very hard to express in words my gratitude to Professor Diane Konker. Over the years, I came to call Diane my Doktormutter. She encouraged me constantly and guided me through all of the hurdles of being a graduate student. Her teaching and research in Soviet history will always be a model for me. I am extremely grateful not only for her mentoring, but also for her sincere care. Thank you, Diane, for reading each and every draft of my long chapters, for asking difficult questions, for helping me clarify my ideas, for being attentive to details, and for editing my prose. Thank you for all the times that I flooded your mailbox with requests of help and you replied within few minutes. Thank you because you opened to me the doors of your office and your house every time I had a panic attack. During my years at the University of Illinois, I was lucky to have many friends who helped me with my studies and my life. The folks from the Slavic Library have a special place in my heart. Thank you to Helen Sullivan, Angela Cannon, Jan Adamczyk, Julia Gauchman, Ellen Knutson, Susanne Birgerson, Tania Stafets, Joseph Lenkart, Kit Condill, and Victoria Jacobs! Thank you to all those with whom I shared my thoughts over a glass of wine, especially to Yulia Dolinnaya and Jasbir Naul, Naza Agassi and Javid Novruzv, Olga and Lyosha Svinarski, Hana and Marek Jochec, Anca Glont, Veneta Ivanova, Evangelos Benos, Victor Nyekel, Dmitry Tartakovsky, Nelly Matova, Mirka and Vasili Paschalidis, Rita and Dima Dmitriev. Thank you for all the times that you grilled sausages with me, laughed with me, cried with me, gave me advice and sharp criticism, helped me move from one apartment to the other, and so much more. In Russia, my friends and fellow historians Galina Yankovskaya, Kostantin Shneider, Yaroslav Leont’ev, and Lia Dolzhanskaia offered me great suggestions and good company. I am also thankful to my dearest friends Marina, Alissa, Masha Romashova and Masha Khrustaleva, Veronika, Katia, Olia, Ira and Moreno, Sveta, Raia and Damir, Igor and Natasha for the good time we shared over the years every time that I worked in the archives of Moscow and Perm’. Thank you to the folks in Kamenka, my favorite place on earth and the birthplace of many ideas vi included in this dissertation. A special thank you goes to Galia and Andrei: I will never understand why you love me so much, but I am happy to put my rationality aside and enjoy being a member of your wonderful family.