Lived Nationality: Policy And Practice In Soviet Georgia, 1945-1978 PDF
Preview Lived Nationality: Policy And Practice In Soviet Georgia, 1945-1978
University of Pennsylvania ScholarlyCommons Publicly Accessible Penn Dissertations 1-1-2015 Lived Nationality: Policy and Practice in Soviet Georgia, 1945-1978 Claire Pogue Kaiser University of Pennsylvania, Lived Nationality: Policy and Practice in Soviet Georgia, 1945-1978 Abstract Tis dissertation asks how nation-ness “happens” at the level of experience. Although the Soviet state was founded on principles of Marxism-Leninism, which sought ultimately to transcend national distinctions, the experience of the Soviet project constructed and consolidated rather than dissolved nationality among its multiethnic population. Existing scholarship on Soviet nationality policies has largely focused on the interwar era from Moscow’s perspective, when the state’s distinctive approach toward managing ethnic diference was conceived and initially implemented. Relying on archival materials in Georgian and Russian, this dissertation examines nationality from the viewpoint of the post-World War Two Georgian SSR, when early Soviet nation- building policies gained traction among its multiethnic citizenry. By the late Stalin era (1945-1953), internal understandings of Georgian national identity were closely intertwined with pride in Stalin as a co-national. Newly endowed Soviet institutions of nation-building from this period gave form to nationalizing aspirations of local- and republic-level actors in Georgia, from Party cadres to academics. I refer to these processes as productive and excisional institutions of nation-building. Te afermath of Khrushchev’s revelations in 1956 of Stalin’s crimes marked a crucial turning point in Georgia, yet for diferent reasons than the resistance, confusion, or hope expressed elsewhere in the USSR. Te violent suppression in 1956 of demonstrations in Tbilisi against Khrushchev’s perceived denigration of Stalin as a Georgian national fgure compelled a reevaluation of what it meant to be Soviet and Georgian in a post-Stalin society. Tis reevaluation took place among republic leaders and “ordinary citizens” alike, as a new national- social contract emerged that facilitated the hegemony of the entitled nationality by the late 1970s. From the nationalization of the republic’s capital to negotiation of cultural practices to political mobilization toward national interests, citizens in Georgia increasingly inhabited nationality through – rather than in spite of – Soviet institutions and collectives. Tis study sheds new light on shifing imperial, republican, and local center-periphery dynamics in the postwar Soviet Union and situates the subtleties of the Georgian case within a broader trajectory of twentieth-century Eurasian nation-building practices. Degree Type Dissertation Degree Name Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) Graduate Group History First Advisor Peter Holquist Keywords Caucasus history, Nationalism, Soviet history, Twentieth-Century history Tis dissertation is available at ScholarlyCommons: htp://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/1795 Subject Categories European History | History | Other History Tis dissertation is available at ScholarlyCommons: htp://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/1795 LIVED NATIONALITY: POLICY AND PRACTICE IN SOVIET GEORGIA, 1945-1978 Claire Pogue Kaiser A DISSERTATION in History Presented to the Faculties of the University of Pennsylvania in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy 2015 Supervisor of Dissertation: Peter Holquist, Associate Professor of History Graduate Group Chairperson: Benjamin Nathans, Associate Professor of History Dissertation Committee: Peter Holquist, Associate Professor of History, University of Pennsylvania Benjamin Nathans, Ronald S. Lauder Endowed Term Associate Professor of History, University of Pennsylvania Bruce Grant, Professor of Anthropology, New York University LIVED NATIONALITY: POLICY AND PRACTICE IN SOVIET GEORGIA, 1945-1978 © 2015 Claire Pogue Kaiser iii DEDICATION For Mike iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This project would not have been possible without the generous contributions and support of a number of individuals and institutions. First and foremost, I thank Peter Holquist and Ben Nathans for encouraging this project since its inception, providing close readings at every stage of the project, and pushing me to explore new directions. Bruce Grant’s work was an early inspiration for the project, and I am grateful for his involvement in its later stages and for helping me to think anthropologically. I feel fortunate to have been at Penn at a time when we built a robust cadre of Russianist and Eurasianist graduate students. In particular, I thank Sam Casper and Alex Hazanov for their collegiality and friendship. I conducted research for this project with the support of the American Councils/Department of State Title VIII Program for Research and Training on Eastern Europe and the Independent States of the Former Soviet Union, the American Research Institute of the South Caucasus, the Pew Foundation, and the University of Pennsylvania. The project also benefited greatly from participation in two workshops: the project on “Georgian Nationalism and Soviet Power,” organized by Jeremy Smith; and the Hoover Institution Workshop on Totalitarian Regimes, organized by Paul Gregory and Mark Harrison. Additionally, feedback from presentations at a number of other conferences and from Maike Lehmann, Ron Suny, Erik Scott, Krista Goff, and Kevin Platt helped improve individual chapters. In Tbilisi, the staff of the Archive Administration of the Ministry of Internal Affairs made my extended research periods productive, efficient, and enjoyable. I v especially thank Ivane Jakhua, Dodo Baghaturia, and director Omari Tushurashvili. My Georgian language teachers Ramaz Kurdadze, Tea Ebralidze, and most of all Nino Sharashenidze equipped me with the tools necessary to carry out the project I envisioned. Frequent conversations with Tim Blauvelt, Oliver Reisner, Giorgi Kldiashvili, and Levan Asabashvili made for a stimulating intellectual environment in Tbilisi. I came to Russian and Soviet history while I was an undergraduate at Georgetown through the dynamism of the late Richard Stites. Nelson Cunningham’s encouragement and counsel have been invaluable. I thank my parents, Paul and Shelley Pogue, for their constant support and for encouraging an interest in history from a young age. Most of all, I thank my husband, Mike Kaiser, for joining and supporting me on this journey. I dedicate this work to him. vi ABSTRACT LIVED NATIONALITY: POLICY AND PRACTICE IN SOVIET GEORGIA, 1945-1978 Claire Pogue Kaiser Peter Holquist This dissertation asks how nation-ness “happens” at the level of experience. Although the Soviet state was founded on principles of Marxism-Leninism, which sought ultimately to transcend national distinctions, the lived experience of the Soviet project constructed and consolidated rather than dissolved nationality among its multiethnic population. Existing scholarship on Soviet nationality policies has largely focused on the interwar era from Moscow’s perspective, when the state’s distinctive approach toward managing ethnic difference was conceived and initially implemented. Relying on archival materials in Georgian and Russian, this dissertation examines nationality from the viewpoint of the post-World War Two Georgian SSR, when early Soviet nation-building policies gained traction among its multiethnic citizenry. By the late Stalin era (1945-1953), internal understandings of Georgian national identity were closely intertwined with pride in Stalin as a co-national. Newly endowed Soviet institutions of nation-building from this period gave form to nationalizing aspirations of local- and republic-level actors in Georgia, from Party cadres to academics. I refer to these processes as productive and excisional institutions of nation-building. The aftermath of Khrushchev’s revelations in 1956 of Stalin’s crimes marked a crucial turning point in Georgia, yet for different reasons than the resistance, confusion, or hope expressed elsewhere in the USSR. The violent vii suppression in 1956 of demonstrations in Tbilisi against Khrushchev’s perceived denigration of Stalin as a Georgian national figure compelled a reevaluation of what it meant to be Soviet and Georgian in a post-Stalin society. This reevaluation took place among republic leaders and “ordinary citizens” alike, as a new national-social contract emerged that facilitated the hegemony of the entitled nationality by the late 1970s. From the nationalization of the republic’s capital to negotiation of cultural practices to political mobilization toward national interests, citizens in Georgia increasingly inhabited nationality through – rather than in spite of – Soviet institutions and collectives. This study sheds new light on shifting imperial, republican, and local center-periphery dynamics in the postwar Soviet Union and situates the subtleties of the Georgian case within a broader trajectory of twentieth- century Eurasian nation-building practices.
The list of books you might like
