INTRODUCTION REX A. WADE (Fairfax, VA, USA) GENERATIONS IN RUSSIAN AND SOVIETHISTORY "0 my son Absalom! my son, my son Absalom! would God I might die for thee, 0 Absalom my son, my son!" Second Samuel 18: 33 "Man is incapable of useful thoughts ' after the age of twenty-five years." Unnamed
University Press, 2001). Weiner’s focus on Vinnytsa reveals
convincingly the extent to which occupation, collaboration, and postwar reconstruction were entangled at the level of the citizenry itself. On the centrality of the war to Russian and Soviethistory, see Stephen Lovell, The Shadow of War: Russia
Nicholas B. Breyfogle, ed., Eurasian Environments: Nature and Ecology in Imperial Russia and SovietHistory (Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 2018), 424 pp., $34.95 (pb), 9780822965633.
In this dive into the environmental history of Russia and the Soviet Union, in case after case
Although students of the Soviet period have long been fascinated with criminality, few works have studied courts and common criminals on the basis of trial records, especially during the nep. Aside from scholarly treatments of show trials, the reasoning behind judicial decisions and criminal pleas has been left to the imagination of Sovietologists. This gap is addressed by examining case files involving the primary form of appeal available to Soviet convicts: cassation. After detailing the evolution of Soviet cassation from its origins in the French Revolution and contextualizing its place in the Soviet justice system, this article embarks on a close reading of convicts’ pleas, prosecutors’ reports, and judges’ written decisions in cassational cases. Cassational appeals are examined to determine how different seats of power within the judiciary sparred over verdicts. Judicial decisions of cassational cases are cross-referenced with legal codes and legislation to determine how Soviet judges applied the law, particularly when considering the social backgrounds of appellants. From the outlook of criminals themselves, the wording of their appeals is analyzed to determine how they understood the law, Soviet society, and what they thought they needed to say to gain redemption. Ultimately, this paper explores how individuals brought before courts understood Soviet power and justice through the lens of criminal appeals during the infancy of the Soviet Union.
This article focuses on the Soviet government’s turn to positive incentives to play the state lottery in the late 1950s, after thirty years of coercing citizens to buy state lottery bonds under Stalin. Khrushchev discontinued the Stalinist bonds in April 1957 and, in their wake, introduced “cash-and-goods lotteries” featuring voluntary participation. The Khrushchev government identified a powerful positive incentive to buy tickets in the coveted consumer goods the lotteries offered as prizes. Citizens were no longer asked to sacrifice toward the state lottery, rather, they were encouraged to risk small sums toward potential consumer gain and the improvement of their living standards – a new way of conceptualizing Soviet citizens’ personal financial contributions to the state as the Soviet Union approached communist prosperity.
This article is a microanalysis of Soviet Holocaust retribution in four cases studies, with focus on Lithuania. It was difficult to disentangle crimes against Jews and crimes against Soviet power in cases involving high-ranking nationalists. Soviet authorities had a strong motivation to condemn nationalist leaders and to justify their execution or deportation to the Gulag, but were not as strongly invested in the outcome of the trials involving ordinary people. Punishing collaborators in Nazi crimes consistently remained an aim in and of itself (but was not to be pursued at the expense of other state campaigns). The authorities and locals pursued justice for murdered Jews while simultaneously utilizing the Jewish wartime fate in the pursuit of broader political aims during postwar Sovietization. In the broader postwar Soviet prosecution of treason and collaboration, authorities and defendants navigated competing understandings of personal participation (lichnoe uchastie) in atrocities and the (ir)redeemability of defendants.
The Soviet and Post-Soviet Review is a peer-reviewed journal which focuses on the history of the Soviet Union and its successor states, including but not limited to the Russian Federation. The journal welcomes original, scholarly submissions in the form of articles, essays, and book reviews relating to Soviet and post-Soviet history, particularly the realms of social, environmental, and cultural history. Authors are requested to submit material for consideration in English, although Russian language submissions will also be considered.
understanding where we are and where we are going. For the fields of Soviethistory and post-Soviet studies, the expression is meaningful in both literal and metaphorical senses. In recent years, the number of publications devoted to the history of the Russian North has been growing steadily, although not as
examines the social-cultural practices, which were generated by more then 70 years of Soviethistory, and were refl ected in low, constitutions and other legislative acts. He illustrated how these practices infl uenced the interaction between power and society, especially in labor and everyday Soviet life
Boss: A Soviet Memoir , trans. and ed. Deborah Kaple (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011 ), xxvi.
5 For further discussion of prisoner memoirs in Soviethistory, see: Cynthia Ruder, Making History for Stalin: The Story of the Belomor Canal (Gainesville: University Press of Florida,