Terror and Democracy in the Age of Stalin: The Social Dynamics of Repression by Wendy Z. Goldman (review)

Abstract

reviews 779 supposedbetrayal ofnationalinterests, whichtheyclaimedwereunderattack from theMasons,Jewsand Bolsheviks. In the finalchapterPlach states'the May coup both triggered and reflected strident debate about the moralhealthof the newlyindependent nation- debate about modernity and the pace of social change,about publicandprivate mores, nationalidentities, and cultural boundaries' (p. 158). This is what the authorhas succeededin analysingin a lucid and wellresearched book. The interwar periodin Polishhistory wouldbenefit from further research. Eva Plach has certainly made a veryimportant contribution to our understandingof the way Polish societyadjusted to independenceand state building. Department ofInternational History A.J. Prazmowska London School ofEconomics Goldman,WendyZ. Terror andDemocracy inthe AgeofStalin: TheSocial Dynamics ofRepression. CambridgeUniversity Press,Cambridgeand New York, 2007. x + 274 pp. Illustrations. Notes. Index. £40.00; £14.99*. $75-°°j $22.99. WendyZ. Goldman'sTerror andDemocracy provides a vividlookat theroleof ordinary Sovietworkers in theStalin-era GreatTerror.Drawingparticularly on stenographic reports ofCommunist Partymeetings from1937to 1939in fiveMoscow factories, Goldman fashionsa compelling case studyof how suspicionand betrayalspreadthroughout the Sovietbureaucracy. In grapplingwithquestionsofcollaboration and culpability, theauthorarguesthat individual workers playedan essential rolein fuelling Terrorviolenceinside their local communities. However,she also takescare to emphasizethatthis initiative frombelow arose not spontaneously and independently, but in responseto increasingly pronouncedideologicalsignalshanded downfrom above. Such an account makes a valuable contribution to contemporary debatesabout individualagencyin dictatorship, generally, and duringthe timeofStalin,inparticular. Goldmanis to be commendedforherrejection ofstandarddichotomies appreciation ofthecombinedimportance ofindivie tionalrivalries and ideologicalpressures in shaping linkbetweenbottom-up participation and top-down iual interactions, instituevents .In exploring the decree,Goldmanhigh-±±g.iii,a tut, wciya ^ciiLicuiy uiapciiacu waiiniigö ama ^uiiiiiianuò wcic luuiiiiciy interpreted byworkers inlight oftheir ownpersonaland localneeds,often in waysunanticipated orundesired byMoscowleaders(pp.13,60).Atthesame time, shealsoacknowledges howworkers' day-to-day struggles gradually came to be framed in an acquiredpoliticallanguageso extreme thatvirtually any ictcLuiy-iiuui misiiap,nuwever muiiuaiic, couiusparKaccusations 01counterrevolution (p.239).Goldman'sannouncedintention istoreconcile totalitarian and revisionist internretations of Stalin-erahistorv. but her workimniiritlv 780 SEER, 87, 4, OCTOBER 2OO9 challenges a newerdebateaboutsocialist 'selfhood' as well.In peoplingher narrative withpartymemberswho mixedideologicalconviction withselfinterested manipulation, Goldmanrevealsa worldwhererational and irrational behaviours werenotmutually exclusive and whereacceptanceofSoviet norms generated, evenforthetruest oftruebelievers, neither clarity ofaction and collective unitynor the eradicationof calculatedacts of evasionand deceit. Indeed,Goldman'sstudy is at itsmostengaging whenitfocuses on these individual actorsand thenitty-gritty specifics oftheirdailylives.She has an eyeforthecolourdetail(referencing workers so hungry they'wereeatingthe rawmaterials in thefactories: thefleshy sidesofthehides,rawleather, and glue',p. 23)and displays an understated appreciation forthetragicomic specificsembeddedin hersources(telling ofa factory director who,whencompelledto admittopastparticipation in a churchchoir,arguedthathe could stillbe considered a good Communist because he had sungsongsnotjust aboutGod, butalso aboutpeasantrebelStenkaRazin,p. 214). However, whileGoldman'sdescriptions areriveting, heranalysis, at times, fallsshort. Whileshetracesvariousofthediverse choices,changesofopinion and protests of rank-and-file historical actors,she arguablypays too little attention to issuesofchoice,changeand protest in and ofthemselves, and to whatthesefactors revealabouttheuniqueshapeof1930sSovietpolitical violence.In what otherdictatorship, forinstance,did police,judges and investigators so oftenbewail the factthat'it is difficult to decide who is innocent and whois guilty' (p.235)?Whatexplainstheinsecurity ofthosein power,their chronic uncertainty about'whatprocedures to follow'and their mounting fears'ofmakingmistakes' (p. 192)?How was itthatthosecharged withcarrying outrepression wereso plaguedbydoubtas to itsefficacy? Goldman'saccountofwhatbrought sucha situation intobeingreadsas incomplete, forshetiestheGreatTerror(1934-39)directly tothehardship of the earlierFirstFive Year Plan (1928-32),presenting the repression of the lateryearsas, to a largedegree,theresult ofpent-up worker anger,coupled withupper-level Bolshevik anxiety aboutthatanger - and a desireon both sides to weed out thoseresponsible forpast abuse. 'By 1937',she writes, 'localofficials werebeingcalledto account.The chaff in thebread,thedead horses, thefailure to meetproduction targets had a newname.It was called "wrecking"'(p.51). Such statements are unconvincing in regardto both chronology and causality; moreover, theyfailto explainphenomenaessential tothevery production ofGoldman'ssourcebase- theprevalence ofworker complaints andinvestigations intoofficial wrong-doing during theindustrializationyears , forexample, ortheinitial reluctance ofworkers toincriminate their colleagueseven amid Kremlin-sanctioned exhortations from1934to 1936. Similarly, Goldmancannotaccount,lateron, forwhy,exactly, theTerror ends,and ultimately falls backon imprecise metaphor, comparing theprocess to a 'snake,devouring itstail'whosemoutheventually 'swalloweditshead' (P-252). Throughout herwork,Goldmanprovocatively pairs'terror' with'democracy ',and itis therelationship betweenthesetwocategories thattheauthor showcases as hergreatest scholarly contribution. However,whilenoting that REVIEWS 781 the 'slogansof repression were intimately intertwined withthoseof democracy '(p.8),sheattimes seemsuncertain, herself, as tothelarger implications ofsuchobservations. Above all, she neglects to defineherterms. Her book requires an explanation ofwhat'democracy' meantin a Sovietcontext, and an acknowledgement...