Sheila Fitzpatrick > Quotes

“Thus the Russian working class had contradictory characteristics for a Marxist diagnosing its revolutionary potential. Yet the empirical evidence of the period from the 1890s to 1914 suggests that in fact Russia's working class, despite its close links with the peasantry, was exceptionally militant and revolutionary. Large-scale strikes were frequent, the workers showed considerable solidarity against management and state authority, and their demands were usually political as well as economic. In the 1905 Revolution, the workers of St Petersburg and Moscow organized their own revolutionary institutions, the soviets, and continued the struggle after the Tsar's constitutional concessions in October and the collapse of the middle-class liberals' drive against the autocracy”
― Sheila Fitzpatrick, The Russian Revolution 1917-1932

“All revolutions have liberté, égalité, fraternité, and other noble slogans inscribed on their banners. All revolutionaries are enthusiasts, zealots; all are utopians, with dreams of creating a new world in which the injustice, corruption, and apathy of the old world are banished forever. They are intolerant of disagreement; incapable of compromise; mesmerized by big, distant goals; violent, suspicious, and destructive. Revolutionaries are unrealistic and inexperienced in government; their institutions and procedures are extemporized. They have the intoxicating illusion of personifying the will of the people, which means they assume the people is monolithic. They are Manicheans, dividing the world into two camps: light and darkness, the revolution and its enemies. They despise all traditions, received wisdom, icons, and superstition. They believe society can be a tabula rasa on which the revolution will write.”
― Sheila Fitzpatrick, The Russian Revolution 1917-1932

“Huge amounts of blood were shed to make and maintain the Soviet Union. Some of it was the blood of idealists, some of thugs and careerists, but most of it was the blood of ordinary people whose main concern was survival.”
― Sheila Fitzpatrick, The Shortest History of the Soviet Union

“This was an age of utopianism. Political leaders had utopian visions, and so did many citizens, especially the younger generation. The spirit is hard to capture in an age of skepticism, since utopianism, like revolution, is so unreasonable.”
― Sheila Fitzpatrick, Everyday Stalinism: Ordinary Life in Extraordinary Times

“To insiders, it was a “scientific” worldview that enabled its possessors to rid themselves and others of all kinds of prejudice and superstition—and incidentally master an aggressive debating style characterized by generous use of sarcasm about the motives and putative “class essence” of opponents.”
― Sheila Fitzpatrick, Everyday Stalinism: Ordinary Life in Extraordinary Times

“The Communists’ sense of mission and intellectual superiority was far too great to allow them to be swayed by mere majority opinion. In this, they were like all other revolutionaries, for what revolutionary worth his salt has ever conceded that “the people’s will” is something different from the mission he has undertaken to carry out on the people’s behalf?”
― Sheila Fitzpatrick, Everyday Stalinism: Ordinary Life in Extraordinary Times

“The Marxist prediction that capitalism would ultimately collapse and be replaced by socialism (Khrushchev’s tactless ‘We will bury you!’) had been a comfort to Soviet Communists as they struggled against Russia’s historical ‘backwardness’ to make a modern, industrialised, urbanised society. They made it, more or less, by the beginning of the 1980s. Soviet power and status was recognised throughout the world. ‘Soviet man’ became a recognisable animal, with close relatives in the Soviet bloc in Eastern Europe, more problematic relatives in China and North Korea, and admirers in the Third World. Then, in one of the most spectacular unpredicted ‘accidents’ of modern history, it was Soviet ‘socialism’ that collapsed, giving way to what the Russians called the ‘wild capitalism’ of the 1990s. An array of fifteen new successor states, including the Russian Federation, emerged blinking into the light of freedom – all, including the Russians, loudly complaining that in the old days of the Soviet Union they had been victims of exploitation.”
― Sheila Fitzpatrick, The Shortest History of the Soviet Union

“Storming was what took place in the frantic days at the end of each month as each enterprise tried to fulfil its monthly plan.”
― Sheila Fitzpatrick, Everyday Stalinism: Ordinary Life in Extraordinary Times

“Since they believed that this revolutionary transformation was in the long-term interests of the people, they were willing to force it through, even when, as with collectivization, a majority of the relevant population clearly opposed it. They explained popular resistance as a result of the backwardness, prejudices, and fears of the unenlightened masses.”
― Sheila Fitzpatrick, Everyday Stalinism: Ordinary Life in Extraordinary Times

“Every time this happened, some arbitrarily chosen scapegoats were punished for overzealousness in carrying out the old policy. These were circumstances that encouraged fatalism and passivity in the population, instilling a sense that the individual was not and could not be in control of his own fate. These attitudes were often evident in Harvard Project interviews, notably with respect to questions about how Soviet citizens could protect themselves or advance their interests in a variety of hypothetical situations. “They could do nothing” was the favorite response—even though this was often contradicted when, under further questioning, the respondents suggested things the hypothetical citizen could do.”
― Sheila Fitzpatrick, Everyday Stalinism: Ordinary Life in Extraordinary Times

“Aunque sólo sea por razones de estructura dramática, la historia de la revolución rusa necesita las grandes purgas del mismo modo que la historia de la revolución francesa necesita el terror jacobino.”
― Sheila Fitzpatrick, La revolución rusa (Hacer Historia)

“But there is obviously a relationship between surveillance and terror; the same institutions are used and many of the same processes are involved.”
― Sheila Fitzpatrick, Everyday Stalinism: Ordinary Life in Extraordinary Times

“Soviet citizens were masters of self-representation as the deserving poor; they regarded it as the state’s obligation to provide them with food, clothing, and shelter.”
― Sheila Fitzpatrick, Everyday Stalinism: Ordinary Life in Extraordinary Times

“Conspiracy theories explaining the Bolshevik victory gained widespread credence: the most popular of these was that of international Jewish conspiracy, since Trotsky, Zinoviev, and a number of other Bolshevik leaders were Jewish; but another theory, revived in Solzhenitsyn's Lenin in Zurich, pictured the Bolsheviks as pawns of the Germans in a successful plot to take Russia out of the war. (...) the attitudes that
enabled such theories to flourish may also have influenced Western scholarly approaches to the problem.”
― Sheila Fitzpatrick, The Russian Revolution 1917-1932

“For social pathologies like the Great Purges, there are no fully satisfactory explanations. Every individual knows that he is powerless, an actual or potential victim. It seems impossible, at least to minds brought up on Enlightenment principles, that something so extraordinary, so monstrously outside normal experience, could happen “by accident.” There must be a reason, people think, and yet the thing seems essentially unreasonable, pointless, serving no one’s rational interests. This was basically the framework within which educated, Westernized, modern Russians, members of the elite, understood (or failed to understand) the Great Purges. The dilemma was all the more agonizing in that these were the very people who were most at risk in this round of terror, and knew it. For the majority of the Russian population, less educated and less Westernized, the conceptual problems were not so acute. The terror of 1937–38 was one of those great misfortunes, like war, famine, floods, and pestilence, that periodically afflict mankind and simply have to be endured.”
― Sheila Fitzpatrick, Everyday Stalinism: Ordinary Life in Extraordinary Times

“Probably nowhere, save for the Eastern countries, would it be possible for the range of classes to be publicly displayed so blatantly as it was in Russia,” the Finnish Communist Arvo Tuominen commented after describing the dining hierarchies of the early 1930s.”
― Sheila Fitzpatrick, Everyday Stalinism: Ordinary Life in Extraordinary Times

“Life has become better, comrades; life has become more cheerful.”       Stalin, 19353”
― Sheila Fitzpatrick, Everyday Stalinism: Ordinary Life in Extraordinary Times

“indeed Soviet officials frequently complained about the “dependent” habits of Homo Sovieticus, his lack of initiative, and his stubborn expectation”
― Sheila Fitzpatrick, Everyday Stalinism: Ordinary Life in Extraordinary Times

“One of the substantive policy issues raised in the Constitution discussion (primarily in letters rather than public meetings, it seems) was the abolition of discrimination, including deprivation of rights, on grounds of social class. The draft Constitution incorporated this important policy change, which was subsequently enacted into law (see Chapter 5). But not everyone approved—in fact, the majority of letters dealing with this issue were uneasy about ending discrimination.”
― Sheila Fitzpatrick, Everyday Stalinism: Ordinary Life in Extraordinary Times

“While Soviet political leaders held certain assumptions about trade, notably that the profit-driven capitalist market was evil and the resale of goods for more than the purchase price constituted a crime (“speculation”), they gave little advance thought to what “socialist trade” might mean.”
― Sheila Fitzpatrick, Everyday Stalinism: Ordinary Life in Extraordinary Times

“Soviet officials frequently complained about the “dependent” habits of Homo Sovieticus, his lack of initiative, and his stubborn expectation that the state would and should provide.26”
― Sheila Fitzpatrick, Everyday Stalinism: Ordinary Life in Extraordinary Times

“An important aspect of the party’s claim to cultural vanguard status was its possession of esoteric knowledge, namely Marxist-Leninist ideology. Knowledge of the basics of historical and dialectical materialism was a prerequisite for all Communists. What this meant in practice was a grasp of Marx’s theory of historical development, which showed that the driving power of history was class struggle; that capitalism throughout the world must ultimately succumb to proletarian revolution, as it had done in Russia in 1917; and that in the course of time the revolutionary proletarian dictatorship would lead the society to socialism. To outsiders, the boiled-down Marxism of Soviet political literacy courses might look simplistic, almost catechismic. To insiders, it was a “scientific” worldview that enabled its possessors to rid themselves and others of all kinds of prejudice and superstition—and incidentally master an aggressive debating style characterized by generous use of sarcasm about the motives and putative “class essence” of opponents. Smugness and tautology, along with polemical vigor, were among the most notable characteristics of Soviet Marxism.”
― Sheila Fitzpatrick, Everyday Stalinism: Ordinary Life in Extraordinary Times: Soviet Russia in the 1930s

“There is no doubt that they ‘take their pleasure sadly,’” noted an Australian visitor to Gorky Park. “Among the many thousands there we saw scarcely a smile, though we assumed that they were enjoying themselves.”
― Sheila Fitzpatrick, Everyday Stalinism: Ordinary Life in Extraordinary Times

“in 1936, the NKVD mood-watchers noted the opinion that Soviet foreign policy was too soft and Hitler’s boldness was to be admired. Hitler was described as charismatic, “very intelligent,” and a man who had worked his way up from the bottom; a student said, “The Fascists are constructing socialism in a peaceful way. Hitler and the fascists are clever people.” In the hungry winter of 1936– 37, approving comments on Hitler multiplied. “People say ‘Better in Germany.’ ‘If Hitler takes power, it will be better in Russia. Only Hitler can give life to the people.”
― Sheila Fitzpatrick, Everyday Stalinism: Ordinary Life in Extraordinary Times

“As Marxists, the Soviet leaders thought it was production that mattered, not distribution.”
― Sheila Fitzpatrick, Everyday Stalinism: Ordinary Life in Extraordinary Times

“It may well be that the Bolsheviks' greatest strength in 1917 was not strict party organization and discipline (which scarcely existed at this time) but rather the party's stance of intransigent radicalism on the extreme left of the political spectrum. While other socialist and liberal groups jostled for position in the Provisional Government and Petrograd Soviet, the Bolsheviks refused to be co-opted and denounced the politics of coalition and compromise. While other formerly radical politicians called for restraint and responsible, statesmanlike leadership, the Bolsheviks stayed out on the streets with the irresponsible and belligerent revolutionary crowd. As the 'dual power' structure disintegrated, discrediting the coalition parties represented in the Provisional Government and Petrograd Soviet leadership, only the Bolsheviks were in a position to benefit. Among the socialist parties, only the Bolsheviks had overcome Marxist scruples, caught the mood of the crowd, and declared their willingness to seize power in the name of the proletarian revolution.”
― Sheila Fitzpatrick, The Russian Revolution 1917-1932

“The initials of the Communist Party in the 1930s, VKP, were read by peasant wits to stand for “Second serfdom” (Vtoroe Krepostnoe Pravo), while in the reading of some Leningrad youths the initials of the USSR itself—SSSR [CCCP] in Russian—became “Stalin’s death will save Russia” (Smert’ Stalina Spaset Rossiiu).”
― Sheila Fitzpatrick, Everyday Stalinism: Ordinary Life in Extraordinary Times