The Public Discussion of the 1936 Constitution and the Practice of Soviet Democracy
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Speaking Out: The Public Discussion of the 1936 Constitution and the Practice of Soviet Democracy By Samantha Lomb B.A. in History, Shepherd University, 2006 M.A. in History, University of Pittsburgh, 2009 Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Kenneth P. Dietrich School of of Arts and Sciences in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy University of Pittsburgh 2014 University of Pittsburgh Dietrich School of Arts and Sciences This dissertation was presented by Samantha Lomb It was defended on April 7, 2014 and approved by William Chase, PhD, Professor Larry E. Holmes, PhD, Professor Emeritus Evelyn Rawski, PhD, Professor Gregor Thum, PhD, Assistant Professor Dissertation Director: William Chase, PhD, Professor ii Copyright © by Samantha Lomb 2014 iii Speaking Out: The Public Discussion of the 1936 Constitution and the Practice of Soviet Democracy Samantha Lomb, PhD University of Pittsburgh 2014 The Stalinist Constitution was a social contract between the state and its citizens. The Central leadership expressly formulated the 1936 draft to redefine citizenship and the rights it entailed, focusing on the inclusion of former class enemies and the expansion of “soviet democracy”. The discussion of the draft was conducted in such a manner as to be all-inclusive and promote the leadership’s definition of soviet democracy. However the issues that the leadership considered paramount and the issues that the populace considered paramount were very different. They focused on issues of local and daily importance and upon fairness and traditional peasant values as opposed to the state’s focus with the work and sacrifice of building socialism. However, the greatest difference was between how the state conceptualized the role of the former people and how the former people used their new rights. This tension between how the people and the state interpreted the role of the government and the duties of the state and citizens, in conjunction with former class enemies using their new rights to agitate for their own interest contributed to the onset of repression in 1937. This work focuses on this disconnect between the central leadership’s narrative of a social contract geared towards state building and the people’s interpretations of a social contract guaranteeing their rights and privileges, to illustrate some of the fundamental conflicts within Soviet society and the problems such tensions caused. iv Table of Contents List of Archives and Terms . Map of the Kirov region in 1935 . ix Introduction . x Chapter 1: Constitutional Theory In the USSR . 28 . 1 The Principles of Constitutional Theory in the USSR . 29 Drafting the Constitution . .. 52 Defining Citizenship . 56 The Rights of Citizens . 62 The Duties of Citizens . 80 The Cult of Labor . 84 Chapter 2: Overview of Life in Kirov in the 1930’s . 87 Chapter 3: The Implementation of the Discussion . 1. 28 How the instructors were supposed to guide . and shape the discussion . 133 The Organizers of the Discussion . 140 The Implementation of the Discussion of the . Draft Constitution . 146 The Problems with the Discussion of the Draft . 165 “Working up” versus Discussion . 175 Conclusion . 180 Chapter 4: The Popular Discussion . 182 The Discussion in the Local Press . 187 The Compilation of Additions and Suggestions . 195 . v Popular Voice . 199 Concerns about political issues . 205 Land and resource issues . .. 207 Social welfare issues . 216 Concerns about educational issues . 233 Military Service . 235 Rights for the Formerly Disenfranchised . 238 Law and Order . 243 Holding Officials Accountable . .248 Chapter 5: The Constitution, the 1937 Elections and Repression . 262 “Anti Soviet” Behavior during the Discussion . 263 The Ratified Constitution and the Elections of 1937 . - . 273 Conclusion . 296 Appendix 1: Text of the Draft Constitution . 302 Appendix 2: Charts and Statistics on the Kirov Region . 320 Appendix 3: Full text of select letters . 331 Bibliography . 335 . vi List of Tables Composition of Committee Sub commissions Population Changes in the Kirov Region- . 52 The Population of Cities, Workers Settlements and Urban style . 320 settlements in thousands of people 1926 1933 Change in Number of People Engaged in Industrial- . Output in Kirov . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 321323 Region Size of Named Enterprises in Kirov Region in 1935 . 326 Living conditions in the city of Kirov . 327 Report on Collectivization of Kirov Region from the 1st of January 1936 based on the data of the Raion Land Organizations. 328 vii List of Figures Map of the Kirov Region . X Changes in Rural and Urban population of Kirov Region 1926 1933 The Population of Cities, Workers Settlements and Urban style settlement- . s i. n . 320 thousands of people 1926 – 1933 Change in Number of People Engaged in Industrial Output in Kirov Region . 322 Percentage of Change in People engaged in Industrial Production in the Kirov . 324 Region . 325 viii Archival abbreviations GARF- The State Archive of the Russian Federation GAKO- The State Archive of the Kirov Region GASPI KO- The State Archives of Social and Political History of the Kirov Region List of Russian terms Aktiv- those who actively engaged in political or agitational work, but may not be party members Artel’- workmen's cooperative association; a type of collective farm with collectivized means of production, but private household property Ispolkom-Executive Committee of a soviet Krai - Administrative region/ province Kraiispolkom-Regional Executive Committee Kraikom – Regional Party Committee Lishentsy - people who were deprived or voting rights due to social class Oblast’- Administrative region/ province Raion- District (of a city or a rural district) Raiispolkom – District Executive Committee Sovnarkom USSR - Council of Peoples Commissars (equivalent of a Cabinet) TsIK -Central Executive Committee of the Soviet government Zemstvo - a form of local government that was instituted during Alexander II ‘s reforms in Imperial Russia i X x Introduction The USSR in the 1930s is justifiably associated with massive social and political upheaval. The central state and party leadership sought to redefine economic, cultural and political relationships throughout the country by launching programs of rapid industrialization and collectivization, among other policies. In the mid 1930’s, there had been enough significant social and economic change that the leadership decided to redefine state-citizen relationships on the basis of a social contract, guaranteeing certain citizens’ rights and material security in exchange for continued effort to construct a new socialist society. One of the vehicles for this change was a new draft constitution, which enfranchised the whole Soviet population with the goal of creating a more participatory society. The drafting process began in 1935 when the Constitutional Drafting Commission was formed; its members came from the highest echelons of the state and party. The committee worked on drafting and revising a new constitution through June 12, 1936, when a finished draft was submitted to the public for discussion. The discussion of the draft constitution took place over a period of six months, from June to December 1936. In this six-month period, an estimated 42,372,990 people participated in meetings and discussions of the draft constitution.1 A final version of the constitution was ratified and presented at the 8th Congress of Soviets in December 1936. 1 This is the number provided by Andrei Sokolov in “Konstitutsiia 1936 goda i kul’turnoe nasledie stalinskogo sotsializma” Sotsial’naia istoriia: ezhegodnik (Sankt Petersburg: 2008), 140. A higher number (51.5 million people or 55% of the country’s adult population) is provided by G. I Tret’iakov, “Soobshcheniia. VSENARODNOE OBSUZHDENIE PROEKTA KONSTITUTSII SSSR,” Voprosy istorii No. 1 Very few changes were made to the draft constitution as a result of the discussion and none to the issues that most concerned the participants in Kirov. This is one reason why this work examines the drafting of the constitution and the public discussion, rather than focusing on any difference that the discussion made in the constitution itself. The discussion of the draft constitution provides a unique opportunity to examine state-citizen relations, what roles the state conceptualized for its citizens in state-building campaigns, and what sort expectations the citizenry had for the state.2 This study also uses the discussion to highlight the agency of the Soviet population. Based on materials from the Kirov region, it argues that the local population, especially the collective farmers co-opted the language of the state to agitate for their own local and personal interests, and that the sometimes-divergent interests of the central leadership and Soviet citizens caused tensions at the local and national level. Given the scope of the discussion campaign and its embodiment of certain fundamental Stalinist state-building techniques, it is surprising that the topic has not received more scholarly attention. This is not the first scholarly work to examine the discussion of the draft constitution. Both Russian and American scholars have 9, (September 1953), 98. Both authors cite Central Executive Committee files from GARF as their sources. 2 Although this study focuses on the interaction between the citizens and state, the importance of the 1936 Constitution goes beyond the USSR. As discussed in Chapter One, that constitution was the first to draw upon the Lasallean and Marxist idea that a constitution was a social contract that reflected the society at the time of its creation. Later constitutions in some socialist and post-colonial states also drew on this tradition. However, the issue of intellectual and political nature of state constitutions, and the influence that the 1936 Soviet Constitution may have had, is a very different research study than this one. In this study, the constitution as a legal document is not of primary importance. What is important is the interaction between the citizenry and the state as seen during the public discussion preceding its adoption. 2 explored various aspects of the discussion of the draft constitution.