DOCSLIB.ORG

Career Patterns in the Soviet Bureaucracy, 1917-1941

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Career Patterns in the Soviet Bureaucracy, 1917-1941 FINAL REPORT TO NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR SOVIET AND EAST EUROPEAN RESEARCH "Career Patterns in the TITLE: Soviet Bureaucracy, 1917-1941" AUTHOR: J. Arch Getty William Chase CONTRACTOR: University of California, Riverside PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR: J. Arch Getty COUNCIL CONTRACT NUMBER: 628-3 DATE: January 10, 1986 The work leading to this report was supported by funds provided by the National Council for Soviet and East European Research. THE NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR SOVIET AND EAST EUROPEAN RESEARCH Edward L. Keenan Suite 304 Chairman, Board of Trustees 1755 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W. Vladimir I. Toumanoff Washington, D.C. 20036 Executive Director (202) 387-0168 INTRODUCTORY NOTE This paper is an interim progress report at the end of two years of a three year project intended to: (1) assemble, test, and disseminate a computerized data bank of biographical and career information on approximately 30,000 Soviet Government and Party officials over the period 1917-1941; (2) analyze the structure and operation of the Soviet bureaucracy in that period. Preliminary findings are presented here, and the authors hope to present a Final Report analyzing changes in the bureaucracy in late 1986. Thereafter the full data bank will be made available to the scholarly community and general public by deposit with the Inter-University Consortium for Political and Social Science Research (at the University of Michigan) and the State Data Bank at the University of California, Berkeley. The project is being funded jointly by the National Council, the National Endowment for the Humanities, and the Fund for the Eighties BOARD OF TRUSTEES: George Breslauer; Herbert J. Ellison; Sheila Fitzpatrick; Edward A. Hewett; David Joravsky; Edward L. Keenan (Chairman); Andrzej Korbonski; Herbert S. Levine; Leon S. Lipson (Vice Chairman); Paul Marer; Daniel C. Matuszewski; Alfred G. Meyer; Marshall D. Shulman; Vladimir I. Toumanoff; Richard S. Wortman SUMMARY Despite the significant number of studies of aspects of the Soviet state and Communist Party bureaucracies in the inter-war period, few works employ aggregate analysis as a means of examining and understanding the overall patterns, behaviors, relationships and internal structure of these bureaucracies during this formative period. This study, which is based on a partially completed data bank containing officeholding and biographical data of Soviet bureaucrats, applies aggregate analysis to selected aspects of bureaucratic practices and behavior from 1925 to 1931. The years 1925, 1927, 1929 and 1931 were chosen for analysis and data were drawn primarily from Vsia Mo3kva, the Moscow city directory. For substantive and methodological reasons, this analysis is restricted to three issues: (1) multiple officeholding and persistence (conversely turnover) as examples of aggregate behavior; (2) the extent and nature of "family circles"; and (3) the structure of the Central Committee. Because the data base on which this analysis is based is only partially completed, this is not a full-scale study of the state and party bureaucracies but rather a series of diagnostic probes and systematic observations. Given the well-known shortage of competent and politically reliable administrators in the 1920s and early 1930s, one might expect multiple officeholding to be common. Yet an analysis of multiple officeholding by national and RSFSR party and state bureaucrats reveals that it was, in fact, quite uncommon — less than 20% held more than one office. Although the exception among all officeholders, multiple officeholding by the bureaucracies' top leaders was somewhat more frequent. Nonetheless, more than 93% of the top leaders held only Page 2 one or two offices simultaneously. Despite the rarity of multiple officeholding, the proportion of officials and especially top leaders who held more than one office grew steadily between 1925 and 1931. One of the most striking features of the USSR and RSFSR bureaucracies during this period is the startling low level of persistence and high rate of turnover among officials — only 11% of officials in selected USSR state agencies and 5% in selected RSFSR agencies held their position for six years. Among those agencies' leading personnel the persistence rate was comparable — 14% and 4% respectively. Precisely why the persistence rate among RSFSR officials was so low is unclear, but one possible explanation can definitely be eliminated — RSFSR officials were not moving into USSR-level positions. The RSFSR commissariats were not a training ground for USSR offices; on the contrary, the two were separate career tracks. An examination of biannual turnover rates revealed that turnover was high (64%) in 1925-1927, lower (43%) in 1927-1929, and highest (77%) in 1929-1931. Although political purging (i.e. of Left and Right Oppositionists) accounts for some of the turnover, it was considerably less significant than structural factors. One fact is incontestable — high rate of turnover meant that the vast majority of bureaucrats, including top leaders, were new to and inexperienced in their jobs. The result was undeniably confusion, inefficiency, and dysfunctional behavior. One can not help but wonder how a bureaucracy in chaos managed to govern effectively. To reduce the inefficiency which turnover bred, one might expect that top bureaucratic leaders brought with them to their new positions a coterie of experienced, competent and reliable administrators, a Page 3 "family circle". But the evidence clearly indicates that family circles were virtually unknown until 1929, and even during 1929-1931 were few in number and usually very small. In some cases, personal secretaries comprised the entire "family". These circles, even the largest ones, were especially small given the population at risk. In those family circles which did exist, the members' experience suggests that the circles were primarily functional rather than political in nature. Our examination of the Central Committee reveals that, unlike the low rate of persistence within state agencies, persistence among Central Committee members was several orders of magnitude higher. In fact, the Central Committee during 1925-1931 was fairly stable. Demotions from or within the Central Committee were nearly always related to factional/oppositional membership rather than structural changes. Robert Daniels' finding that the Central Committee was selected from bureaucratic constituencies is correct. Despite it3 remarkable structural consistency, two constituencies within the Central Committee received preferential treatment when it came to promotions during this period — regional party secretaries and Vesenkha (Supreme Council of National Economy) presidium members. The rise of the regional party secretaries during this period was probably related to the process and regional needs of collectivization. To ensure the successful implementation of that policy, it was necessary to give regional secretaries more power. The increased importance of Vesenkha presidium members undoubtedly reflected the Central Committee's increased concern with implementing it3 newly adopted economic policies, especially industrialization. The Page 4 promotion of both Vesenkha and regional party secretaries suggests that the structural arrangements of the Central Committee depended on economic goals and policies rather than on the whims of Stalin or others in selecting members. Introduction Analyses of the Communist Party and Soviet state bureaucracies during the interwar years are common to Soviet studies. Historians and political scientists have published numerous works which inform readers about the formation, evolution and structure of these bureaucracies. While all such studies focus on bureaucracy to understand the structure of power, they utilize a variety of approaches. Some seek to demonstrate the role of the bureaucracies in the formation of totalitarianism, others come to the subject armed with interest group theory, and still others employ traditional political narrative. Irrespective of the approach used, all these studies of necessity focus to some extent on structure. Yet most confine their analyses to content and behavior, usually the membership and behavior of one or, at best, a few agencies. Another approach is to analyze the overall structure of the bureaucracy. One need not be a Straussian to recognize that structure is important in its own right. This study will not argue that the Communist Party's or the Soviet state's bureaucracy was a determining factor in anything. Rather it emphasizes structure as a research strategy which seeks to expose aggregate patterns. Aggregate analysis is relatively new to Soviet studies. Few works exist which deal with overall patterns, behaviors, relationships and internal structure of the party and state bureaucracies during their formative years. Yet aggregate analysis of selected aspects of officeholding can provide some answers to longstanding questions and raise new questions about these bureaucracies. This paper confines itself to the period 1925-1931 for both Page 2 substantive and methodological reasons. These years span a period of profound political importance and major upheavals in Soviet society associated with the fall of a moderate political leadership, the rise of Stalin, the collectivization of agriculture, the end of the New Economic Policy experiment in market socialism, the beginnings of planned industrialization, and a cultural revolution. In one way or another, the party and state bureaucracies were affected by and
Load more

Recommended publications
  • State Composers and the Red Courtiers: Music, Ideology, and Politics in the Soviet 1930S
    JYVÄSKYLÄ STUDIES IN HUMANITIES 78 Simo Mikkonen State Composers and the Red Courtiers Music, Ideology, and Politics in the Soviet 1930s JYVÄSKYLÄN YLIOPISTO JYVÄSKYLÄ STUDIES IN HUMANITIES 78 Simo Mikkonen State Composers and the Red Courtiers Music, Ideology, and Politics in the Soviet 1930s Esitetään Jyväskylän yliopiston humanistisen tiedekunnan suostumuksella julkisesti tarkastettavaksi yliopiston Villa Ranan Blomstedtin salissa marraskuun 24. päivänä 2007 kello 12. Academic dissertation to be publicly discussed, by permission of the Faculty of Humanities of the University of Jyväskylä, in the Building Villa Rana, Blomstedt Hall, on November 24, 2007 at 12 o'clock noon. UNIVERSITY OF JYVÄSKYLÄ JYVÄSKYLÄ 2007 State Composers and the Red Courtiers Music, Ideology, and Politics in the Soviet 1930s JYVÄSKYLÄ STUDIES IN HUMANITIES 78 Simo Mikkonen State Composers and the Red Courtiers Music, Ideology, and Politics in the Soviet 1930s UNIVERSITY OF JYVÄSKYLÄ JYVÄSKYLÄ 2007 Editors Seppo Zetterberg Department of History and Ethnology, University of Jyväskylä Irene Ylönen, Marja-Leena Tynkkynen Publishing Unit, University Library of Jyväskylä Jyväskylä Studies in Humanities Editorial Board Editor in Chief Heikki Hanka, Department of Art and Culture Studies, University of Jyväskylä Petri Karonen, Department of History and Ethnology, University of Jyväskylä Matti Rahkonen, Department of Languages, University of Jyväskylä Petri Toiviainen, Department of Music, University of Jyväskylä Minna-Riitta Luukka, Centre for Applied Language Studies, University of Jyväskylä Raimo Salokangas, Department of Communication, University of Jyväskylä URN:ISBN:9789513930158 ISBN 978-951-39-3015-8 (PDF) ISBN 978-951-39-2990-9 (nid.) ISSN 1459-4331 Copyright ©2007 , by University of Jyväskylä Jyväskylä University Printing House, Jyväskylä 2007 ABSTRACT Mikkonen, Simo State composers and the red courtiers.
    [Show full text]
  • The Public Discussion of the 1936 Constitution and the Practice of Soviet Democracy
    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.
    [Show full text]
  • Mccauley Stalinism the Thirties.Pdf
    Stalin and Stalinism SECOND EDITION MARTIN McCAULEY NNN w LONGMANLONDON AND NEW YORK The Thirties 25 and October 1929, and Stalin declared on 7 November 1929 that the great PART TWO: DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSIS 2 THE movement towards collectivisation was under way [8]. The Politburo stated on 5 January 1930 that large-scale kulak production was to be replaced by large- scale kolkhoz production. Ominously, for the better-off farmers it also proclaimed the THIRTIES ‘liquidation of the kulaks as a class*. It was hoped that the collectivisation of the key grain-growing areas, the North Caucasus and the Volga region, would be completed by the spring of 1931 at the latest and the other grain-growing areas by the spring of 1932. A vital role in rapid collectivisation was played by the 25,000 workers who descended on the countryside to aid the ‘voluntary* process. The ‘twenty-five thousanders*, as they were called, brooked no opposition. They were all vying with one another for the approbation of the party. Officially, force was only permissible against kulaks, but the middle and poor peasants were soon sucked into the maelstrom of violence. Kulaks were expelled from their holdings and their POLITICS AND THE ECONOMY stock and implements handed over to the kolkboz. What was to become of them? Stalin was brutally frank: ‘It is ridiculous and foolish to talk at length After the war scare of 1927 [5] came the fear of foreign economic intervention. about dekulakisation. ... When the head is off, one does not grieve for the hair. Wrecking was taking place in several industries and crises had occurred in There is another question no less ridiculous: whether kulaks should be allowed to join the collective farms? Of course not, others — or so Stalin claimed in April 1928.
    [Show full text]
  • Number 167 Draft: Not for Citation Without Permission
    DRAFT: NOT FOR CITATION WITHOUT PERMISSION OF AUTHOR NUMBER 167 POLITICS OF SOVIET INDUSTRIALIZATION: VESENKHA AND ITS RELATIONSHIP WITH RABKRIN, 1929-30 by Sheila Fitzpatrick Fellow, Kennan Institute for Advanced Russian Studies Colloquium Paper December, 1983 Kennan Institute for Advanced Russian Studies, Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars Washington, D.C. -1- The historical study of Soviet politics has its peculia­ rities. Dealing with the 1920s, Western historians have generally studied factional politics - Lenin and Stalin versus the oppositions • or the manipulation of the party apparatus that brought Stalin to power. Soviet historians have also concentrated heavily on the factional struggles, admittedly from a somewhat different perspective. In addition, they often write histories of particular government institutions (Sovnarkom, Rabkrin and the like) that rather resemble commissioned company histories in their avoidance of the scandalous, dramatic and political aspects of their theme. Reaching the 1930s, both Western and Soviet historians have a tendency to throw up their hands and retire from the fray. Western historians run out of factions to write about. There is a memoir literature on the purges and a rather schematic scholarly literature on political control mechanisms, but the Stalin biography emerges as the basic genre of political history. For Soviet historians, the subject of the purges is taboo except for a few risqu~ paragraphs in memoirs, and even biographies of Stalin are not possible. There are no more institutional histories, and the safest (though extremely boring} topic is the 1936 Constitution. The peculiarity of the situation lies in the neglect of many of the staples of political history as practised outside -2- the Soviet field, notably studies of bureaucratic and regional politics and local political histories.
    [Show full text]
  • Information to Users
    INFORMATION TO USERS This manuscrit has been reproduced from the microSm master. UMI films the text directly &om the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from aiy type of conq>uter printer. The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photogr^hs, print bleedthrough, substandard margin»;, and inqnoperalignment can adversety affect reproduction. In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed,w l Q indicate a note the deletion. Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand comer and continuing from left to right in equal sectionssmall overlaps.with Each original is also photographed in one exposure and is included in reduced form at the back of the book. Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6" x 9" black and white photographic prints are available for aity photographs or illustrations ^>peaiing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order. UMI A Bell & Howell Information Company 300 Nonn 2eeb Road. Ann Arbor. Ml 48106-1346 USA 313.'761-4700 800.'521-0600 Order Number 9517097 Russia’s revolutionary underground: The construction of the Moscow subway, 1931—1935 Wolf, William Kenneth, Ph.D. The Ohio State University, 1994 UMI 300N.ZeebRd.
    [Show full text]
  • Copyright 2012 Maria Galmarini
    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.
    [Show full text]
  • We Shall Refashion Life on Earth! the Political Culture of the Young Communist
    UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA Los Angeles We Shall Refashion Life on Earth! The Political Culture of the Young Communist League, 1918-1928 A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree Doctor of Philosophy in History by Sean Christopher Guillory 2009 © Copyright by Sean Christopher Guillory 2009 To Rodney, Roderick, Dianne, and Maya iii Table of Contents Acknowledgements v Vita viii Abstract x Introduction: What is the Komsomol? 1 Chapter 1 “We were not heroes. Our times were heroic” 44 Chapter 2: “Are you a komsomol? Member of the party? Our guy!” 88 Chapter 3: “He’s one of the guys and if he wants three wives that’s his business.” 131 Chapter 4: “Activists are a special element” 190 Chapter 5: “The right to punish and pardon - like God judges the soul” 246 Chapter 6: “A New Voluntary Movement” 292 Conclusion “Youth it was that led us” 345 Bibliography 356 iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Intellectual work is always a collective effort, and the study before the reader is no exception. Several institutions and individuals provided direct or indirect financial assistance, scholarly advice, intellectual influence, and moral and emotional support in this long journey. I would like to thank the History Departments at UC Riverside and UCLA, the UCLA Graduate Division, the UCLA Center for European and Eurasian Studies for academic and financial support. Research for this project was provided by the generous funding from the United States Department of Education through the Fulbright- Hays Program. I wish to thank the archivists in Russia for their patience and aid in finding materials for this study.
    [Show full text]
  • Caffeinated Avant-Garde: Futurism During the Russian Civil War 1917-1921
    Australian Journal of Politics and History: Volume 58, Number 3, 2012, pp. 353-366. Caffeinated Avant-Garde: Futurism During the Russian Civil War 1917-1921 IVA GLISIC University of Western Australia Scholarship on Russian Futurism often interprets this avant-garde movement as an essentially utopian project, unrealistic in its visions of future Soviet society and naïve in its comprehension of the Bolshevik political agenda. This article questions such interpretations by demonstrating that the activities of Russian Futurists during the Civil War period represented a measured response to what was a challenging contemporary socio-political reality. By examining the development of Futurist ideology through this period, considering first-hand Futurist descriptions of dealing with the fledgling Soviet system, and recalling Slavoj Žižek’s interpretations of revolution and utopianism, a different image of the Futurist project emerges. Futurism, indeed, was a movement far more aware of the intricacies of its historical period than has previously been recognised. Vladimir Mayakovsky on How the Soviet System Works In 1919, on 19 September, the famous Futurist poet Vladimir Mayakovsky sat down to pen a letter — a letter that he did not want to write.1 The problem, and the reason for Mayakovsky’s chagrin, was that the letter in question was to be addressed to someone working within that most famous of amorphous voids: the Soviet bureaucracy. Though ostensibly seeking payment — after several failed first-hand attempts — for work he had been commissioned to produce, Mayakovsky’s letter quickly grew into something else altogether, as he expressed his frustration and concern with the convoluted nature of the fledgling Soviet administration.
    [Show full text]
  • SOVIET FORDISM in PRACTICE – Building and Operating the Soviet River
    SOVIET FORDISM IN PRACTICE – Building and operating the Soviet River Rouge, 1927-1945 The technical processes and production methods of Ford’s factory should form the basis of Avtostroi’s planning. – Stepan Dybets, 19301 Giancarlo Camerana was secretary of the Fiat board of directors and second- in-command at the Italian carmaker when he made his first trip to the United States in September 1936. His destination was Detroit, where Charles Sorensen, head of operations at Ford Motor Company, received him personally and showed him around the Rouge factory. At the time of Camerana’s voyage, Fiat was projecting the construction of a new production complex at Mirafiori. The new factory’s layout was to be based on River Rouge.2 One month later, in October 1936, Ferdinand Porsche was in Detroit. The engineer-in-chief of the Nazi Volkswagen plant, then in the planning phase, visited Ford Motor Company to keep abreast with the latest American production technology. The new German factory, after all, was to be modeled on River Rouge.3 After traveling on to New York, Camerana paid the obligatory homage to Sorensen (“I am speechless in admiration of the Ford factories and organization”) before asking for advice. How could the new plant at Mirafiori most 1 TsANO (Central Archive of the Nizhnii Novgorod Oblast’), f. 2431, o.4, d.11a, l. 21. 2 Camerana to Sorensen, 28 Sep 1936, BFRC, Acc. 38, Box 80. Duccio Bigazzi, La Grande Fabbrica. Organizzazione Industriale E Modelo Americano Alla Fiat Dal Lingotto a Mirafiori (Milano: Feltrinelli, 2000), 73-75. 3 Ghislaine Kaes, “Vortrag über die Nordamerikareise des Herrn Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • From Inzhener to ITR: Russian Engineers and the First Five-Year
    From Inzhener to ITR: Russian Engineers and the First Five-Year Plan A Thesis Submitted To the Temple University Graduate Board In Partial Fulfillment Of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts By John Vidumsky January, 2011 Approvals: Dr. Vladislav Zubok, Department of History Dr. Jay Lockenour, Department of history i ABSTRACT The Russian engineering corps was almost completely transformed during the first five-year plan, which ran from 1928-1932. The purpose of this thesis is to examine the nature of that change, and the forces that drove it. In this paper, I will argue that the corps was transformed in four fundamental ways: class composition, skill level, role in production, and political orientation. This paper begins by examining the old engineering corps on the eve of the first five year plan. Specifically, it examines Russian engineers as a subgroup of the intelligentsia, and how that problematized their relationship with power. I next examine how the Soviet government forcibly reshaped the engineering corps by pressure from above, specifically by a combination of state terror and worker-promotion campaigns. These two phenomena were closely intertwined. Along with collectivization and crash industrialization, they were part of the “Cultural Revolution” that reshaped Russian society in this period. I next examine how the campaign of terror against engineers was used by Stalin and his camp for political gain on a variety of fronts. Lastly, I will examine how engineers became part of the Soviet elite after 1931. For sources, I rely especially on the correspondence between Stalin, Kaganovich, and Molotov, which was published in the Yale University Annals of Communism series.
    [Show full text]
  • Information to Users
    INFORMATION TO USERS This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI films the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any type of computer printer. The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction. In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand corner and continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Each original is also photographed in one exposure and is included in reduced form at the back of the book. Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6" x 9" black and white photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustration^ appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order. University Microfilms International A Beil & Howeil Information C om pany 300 North Zeeb Road. Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 USA 313 761-4700 800:521-0600 Order Number 9238269 The American factor in Soviet industrialization: Fordism and the First Five-Year Plan, 1928-1932 Schultz, Kurt Stephen, Ph.D.
    [Show full text]
  • Lev Kamenev: a Case Study in 'Bolshevik Centrism'
    LEV KAMENEV: A CASE STUDY IN ‘BOLSHEVIK CENTRISM’ by NICHOLAS W. COOMBS A thesis submitted to the University of Birmingham for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY School of Government and Society Centre for Russian and East European Studies University of Birmingham MAY 2016 University of Birmingham Research Archive e-theses repository This unpublished thesis/dissertation is copyright of the author and/or third parties. The intellectual property rights of the author or third parties in respect of this work are as defined by The Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988 or as modified by any successor legislation. Any use made of information contained in this thesis/dissertation must be in accordance with that legislation and must be properly acknowledged. Further distribution or reproduction in any format is prohibited without the permission of the copyright holder. ABSTRACT This dissertation challenges the view that Lev Kamenev lacked a clear socialist vision and had no discernible objectives. It contends that Kamenev had an ideological line and political goals shaped by Ferdinand Lassalle. Kamenev adopted Lassalle’s desire for a democratic socialist republic and his method to achieve end aims. Through dialogical discourse Kamenev aimed to gain allies by overcoming differences by focusing on points of agreement. This was his ‘Bolshevik Centrism’. Ideologically, Kamenev absorbed Lassalle’s concept of the ‘Fourth Estate’, which mandated proletarian culture first predominate in society before revolution could occur. This helps explain his opposition to revolution in 1905 and 1917, and sheds light on his assessment in the early 1920s that the Bolsheviks had not founded the ‘dictatorship of the proletariat’, but the ‘dictatorship of the party’.
    [Show full text]