The 1960s saw a time of great change throughout the world as it was fully engulfed in a cultural and political revolution.  One such revolution that changed the course of socialism took place in Czechoslovakia, in what is commonly referred to as The Prague Spring of 1968. Czechoslovakia’s attempted period of change and improvement began with the removal of Antonin Novotny and the promotion of Alexander Dubcek as the first Secretary of the Czechoslovak Communist Party. Among Dubcek’s goals, he planned to amend the constitution to bring back a sense of greater personal freedom and political democracy. He revised the constitution and promoted the “Action Program” to increase civil rights and liberties, to end censorship, which would subsequently allow Czech citizens to criticize the government as they saw fit, reform the economic system based on the socialist market, and to restrict the powers of the secret police. What resulted was the chaotic, yet peaceful Prague Spring. This revolution, involving intellectuals, students, workers and farmers showed support for Dubcek’s leadership through strikes and the formation of workers’ councils.

Although Dubcek aimed to scale down the oppressive facet of the government, it is important to note that he still promoted the Czech Communist Party and wanted to reassure the Soviet government that Czechoslovakia fully intended to remain in the Warsaw Pact. Despite this promise, Brezhnev saw the changes in Czechoslovakia as a threat to the future of the Warsaw Pact and to communism as a whole. The USSR met with other countries of the Warsaw Pact including Poland, East Germany, Bulgaria and Hungary on several occasions. One such meeting occurred on July 14^th  in which the party leaders of the respective countries wrote a letter to the Czechoslovak Party. This letter outlined the risks of such a counterrevolution by admitting that “the development of events in [Czechoslovakia] evokes deep anxiety.” The letter further detailed how it was the common cause of the countries involved in The Warsaw Pact to protect the dissolution of socialism.

Another meeting took place on August 3^rd in which the infamous Brezhnev Doctrine was formulated. In the document is written that “each Communist party is free to apply the principles of Marxism-Leninism and socialism in its own country, but it cannot deviate from these principles… the weakening of any of the links in the world system of socialism directly affects all the socialist countries.” This very clearly states the strict guidelines to being a member of the Warsaw Pact and is very explicit in its argument that socialism is dependent upon every country remaining true to the type of government.

Despite these warnings, the Soviets invaded Czechoslovakia on August 21, 1968 with the aid of other countries of the Warsaw Pact. A total of 500,000 troops from the Soviets, Poland, Hungary, Bulgaria and East Germany defended Brezhnev’s ideal of repressing the Prague reforms, more commonly referred to as “normalization.” The invasion ended with the removal of Alexander Dubcek as the party leader and a swift end to the numerous reforms made within Czechoslovakia including the re-introduction of censorship. The invasion, although relatively bloodless, gave the rest of the countries of the Warsaw Pact a very straightforward message. Moscow made it clear that they were not going to tolerate democracy of any sort among the Communist nations and the invasion of the Prague Spring by members of the Warsaw Pact helped the Soviets emphasize that the rest of the members of the union were steadfast in their convictions as well.

The Prague Spring of 1968 became a symbol for the tightening of socialism’s fist through the denouncement of any sort of democracy. The Soviet invasion of Prague followed Alexander Dubcek’s ideas of reform in his proposals of decreased censorship and increased government criticism. The invasion was meant to give not only Czechoslovakia, but all the members of the Warsaw Pact, the reminder that socialist countries were to remain a part of the Warsaw Pact and that they also needed to remain socialist in every way, on pain of death. Dubcek’s vision of “socialism with a human face” was crushed in every way, but the “soul of communism” saw its demise as well.

Works Cited

Kovalev, Sergei. “The International Obligations of Socialist Countries.” Seventeen Moments in Soviet History. http://www.soviethistory.org/index.php?page=article&ArticleID=1968kovalev1&SubjectID=1968czechoslovakia&Year=1968

Siegelbaum, Lewis. “Crisis in Czechoslovakia.” Seventeen Moments in Soviet History. http://www.soviethistory.org/index.php?page=subject&SubjectID=1968czechoslovakia&Year=1968&navi=byYear

“TASS, The Warsaw Letter.” Seventeen Moments in Soviet History. http://www.soviethistory.org/index.php?page=article&ArticleID=1968spring1&SubjectID=1968czechoslovakia&Year=1968

Image: http://www.kingsacademy.com/mhodges/03_The-World-since-1900/11_The-Bewildering-60s/pictures/STP-121_Czech-uprising_1968.jpg

The Soviet era of Russia is known for its radical changes in the not only the political, but also social lives of everyday comrades. The film industry under the Soviet Union took a surprising turn under the direction of the new chairman, Boris Shumiatskii. Shumiatskii  changed the role of film from a vehicle to promote official values to a more entertaining and enjoyable experience.

One example of such a film was the wildly popular Happy-Go-Lucky Fellows. http://www.soviethistory.org/bigScreenVideo.php?SubjectID=1934film&Year=1934&navi=byYear This clip from the musical directed by Grigorii Aleksandrov shows  a much  more jovial side of film. Unlike the film, Bed and Sofa, which we viewed in class,  the new Soviet film doesn’t include deep or heavy themes. The musical includes a band who begins playing and descends into a comical routine in which they have a large fight amongst the entire group. It is very similar to The 3 Stooges in its dimwitted humor and childish violence. It seems as if it’s purely made for the enjoyment of the masses. In an article written by Shumiatskii, he  fawns over Happy-Go-Lucky Fellows. He loves that it is “an optimistic film sprinkled with joy, laughter and merriment.” He also says “the film is a marvvelous relaxation and audiences that have seen The Happy-Go-Lucky Fellows will find it easier to work afterwards.” (B. Z. Shumiatskii, Kinematografiia millionov (Moscow, 1935))

Sources:

B. Z. Shumiatskii, Kinematografiia millionov (Moscow, 1935)

Geldern, James Von. Seventeen Moments in Soviet History. http://www.soviethistory.org/index.php?page=subject&SubjectID=1934film&Year=1934&navi=byYear

http://www.soviethistory.org/bigScreenVideo.php?SubjectID=1934film&Year=1934&navi=byYear

Churches in Russia entered its final chapter by the year 1929. What started out as a decree by the Soviet government on the separation of Church and state ended with a violent attack on church property. The resistance to religion stemmed from a Marxist belief that “existence determines consciousness, and only knowledge derived from observed reality, without the intercession of any external force or mover is valid.” Thus, since religious belief has always been largely based on unwavering support of an idea without a known, proper source, the Bolsheviks saw  this as a superstitious idea and as a source that could hamper the progress of a scientific state.

By 1923, the state had already increasingly placed restrictions on the church. The local police were recruited to close churches, using whatever methods necessary to do so. There were even mobs of citizens and anti-religious militants during the Russian civil war who vandalized churches and monasteries and went so far as to even kill bishops and priests.

Clearly, much of the damage of ridding the country of religious influence and propaganda had been successful. However, by the year 1929, the government placed even stricter restrictions on the church and imposed new and stiffer penalties. They also began using materials from churches for industry. For example, it was not uncommon to melt the metal from church bells for additional metal.

The Soviet Union certainly saw a significant amount of change in the year 1929 with the introduction of the first Five-Year Plan and the announcement to plan mass collectivization. However, it would seem that the anti-religious campaign had already been aggressively pursued and this important year for Russian history and the Soviet Union did not actually see much change on the religious front.

Sources:

Freeze, Gregory L.. Russia: A History. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997.

http://www.soviethistory.org/images/Large/1929/churchbells.jpg?rand=26540197

http://www.soviethistory.org/index.php?page=subject&SubjectID=1929religion&Year=1929&navi=byYear

Before the start of the First World War under the reign of Tsar Nicholas II, Russia was a primarily agrarian society. Therefore, it was widely believed that throughout the war and thereafter the inhabitants of Russia would be well fed due to the abundance of grains bei the time Februng grown. However, the supply of food along with other essential items such as kerosene, footwear and textiles had dramatically dwindled quite rapidly.

The February Revolution is believed to have started due to protests regarding the food shortage, wartime privation and the government’s ineffectiveness.

Lines such as these in which the common people waited to buy bread were common throughout many of Russia’s cities, especially affecting Petrograd.

After the Provisional Government overtook the government, they dealt with the food shortage by establishing a State Committee on Food Supply on March 9th and then soon after that they set a fixed price on grain. The Provisional Government believed that this would create a stable environment for currency, which was a large problem in countries such as Germany in which inflation caused the price of bread to rise dramatically as well. However, the fixed price did not help with the shortage and even caused more problems in Russia such as jammed river ports, railroads and roads. Clearly, this problem extended past an issue of hunger. It had far reaching negative implications.

Sources:

Photographs of a bread line:  http://www.dhr.history.vt.edu/modules/eu/mod03_1917/evidence_detail_19.html

Seventeen Moments in Soviet History:  http://www.soviethistory.org/index.php?page=subject&SubjectID=1917food&Year=1917&navi=byYear

Freeze text:  Freeze, Gregory L. Russia: A History. New York: Oxford University Press, 2009. 275. Print

An article in The New York Times entitled “Russian Poland on Verge of Revolution” describes a country that has eclipsed the fine line between unrest and revolution. In Gregory Freeze’s text he explains how the insurrection went beyond the borders of Russia into the Ukraine, Bessarabia, the Baltics, Finland, Crimea, the Cacasus, Sibera, Central Asia and finally, Poland. The citizens of Poland were especially discontented after the uprising in 1863 due to their essential loss of rights and they played very important and active roles in the revolution of 1905.

The article describes the social climate of Poland in which the disturbance between the rioters and the united forces of the military and police escalated to a number of wounds and deaths due to the absence of the reservists who had been called out to serve on active military duty. The rioters went so far as to blow up railway bridges and disconnect telegraph wires.

Throughout these protests, the writer describes how soldiers and police attempt to escape from the protests. For example, the prefect of Police of Warsaw left Poland for St. Petersburg and the article also points out how soldiers took advantage of the confusion of the explosion of the train to escape. Although very little is written about this in the article, I feel it’s the most significant portion. It’s not often one sees members of a police or military force try to run away from a disturbance as serious as this. It’s certainly a sign that the government was ready to lie down and accept defeat to avoid future conflict. However, it also may be indicative of how the individual soldiers and/or police force were also proponents of the revolution.

Cited Sources:

http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy.lib.vt.edu:8080/hnpnewyorktimes/docview/96493641/fulltextPDF/14064D724A1382AAC0B/6?accountid=14826

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/5f/Tiflis_railway_strike_1905.jpg

Welcome to my first blog post! My name is Jessica and I’m a history major and a senior here at Virginia Tech. Throughout my career at Virginia Tech I have admittedly never had much of an interest in Russian history. However, this past summer I started learning a lot about Central Asian History and I stumbled across some interesting texts about the relationship between Central Asians and Russians. It helped me realize the highly complex history of Russia and how the country was a larger member of the making of history than I had initially realized.

Because of my interest in both Central Asian history and my new-found interest in Russian history I chose this image of  the Emir of Bukhara, Alim Khan taken by Prokudin-Gorskii. Alim Khan was the last known emir of the Manghit dynasty before the abolition of the dynasty by the Bolsheviks as well as the last emir of Bukhara, which is now the country known as Uzbekistan. Alim Khan is such a wonderful example of the shift from a purely Muslim Central Asian nation to one ruled and greatly influenced by Russian and Soviet control.

Alim Khan, born on January 3, 1880 was the son of Sayed Abd al-Ahad who sent Alim to live and study in St. Petersburg as a cadet at the Nikolaievsky Military Academy. Because he spent much of his childhood in Russia, Alim ignored Bukhara for long stretches of time while he visited what he felt was his motherland. He was warmly received by the Romanovs who showered him with expensive gifts during his visit, however, his luck quickly changed as the Bolsheviks chose to hunt him down instead after his refusal to step down as the emir. Alim Khan fled Bukhara in September 1920 to Kabul, Afghanistan.

It is fascinating to me to know about a place like Bukhara which was heavily influenced by the religion of Islam came under the control of Alim Khan who associated himself with an Eastern-Orthodox nation which had completely different values and traditions as his homeland. His education in Russia is so indicative of Bukhara becoming less inclined towards Central Asian customs and Islamic traditions and more inclined towards Russian attitudes.

Permanent Record:

http://www.loc.gov/pictures/item/prk2001000001/

Cited Hyperlink Sources:

http://forum.alexanderpalace.org/index.php?topic=879.5;wap2

http://russiasperiphery.blogs.wm.edu/central-asia/uzbekistan/general/emir-of-bukhara-saiyid-mir-alim/