Sheila Fitzpatrick

Last updated

Sheila Fitzpatrick
Sheila Fitzpatrick photo2.pdf
Born (1941-06-04) 4 June 1941 (age 83)
Melbourne, Australia
NationalityAustralian
CitizenshipAustralian, American
Alma mater University of Melbourne
St Antony's College, Oxford
London School of Slavonic and East European Studies
Occupation(s)Historian, academic
Known forWorks on the history of modern Russia, the history of Soviet Union, and the Stalinist period
Writing career
Genre History
Subject Soviet Union
Literary movement People's history
Notable worksBeyond Totalitarianism
Everyday Stalinism
Stalin's Peasants
Notable awards Mellon Foundation Award
Relatives Brian Fitzpatrick
Website
sydney.edu.au/arts/history/staff/profiles/sheila.fitzpatrick.php

Sheila Mary Fitzpatrick (born June 4, 1941) is an Australian historian, whose main subjects are history of the Soviet Union and history of modern Russia, especially the Stalin era and the Great Purges, of which she proposes a "history from below", and is part of the "revisionist school" of Communist historiography. She has also critically reviewed the concept of totalitarianism and highlighted the differences between Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union in debates about comparison of Nazism and Stalinism.

Contents

Fitzpatrick is professor at the Australian Catholic University (Melbourne), honorary professor at the University of Sydney, and Distinguished Service Professor Emerita at the University of Chicago. Prior to this, she taught Soviet history at the University of Texas at Austin and was the Bernadotte Everly Schmitt Distinguished Service Professor at the University of Chicago. She is considered a founder of the field of Soviet social history.

Family

Sheila Fitzpatrick was born in Melbourne in 1941, the daughter of Australian author Brian Fitzpatrick and his second wife Dorothy Mary Davies. [1] Her younger brother was the historian David P. B. Fitzpatrick.

Fitzpatrick's first marriage to Alex Bruce, a fellow University of Melbourne student, soon ended. Her second marriage to the political scientist Jerry F. Hough, from 1975 to 1983, ended in divorce. While living in the United States, Fitzpatrick married the theoretical physicist Michael Danos (1922-1999). [2]

Biography

Fitzpatrick attended the University of Melbourne (BA, 1961) and received her doctorate from St Antony's College, Oxford (1969), with a thesis entitled The Commissariat of Education under Lunacharsky (1917–1921). She was a Research Fellow at the London School of Slavonic and East European Studies from 1969 to 1972. [3]

Fitzpatrick is a member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences and the Australian Academy of the Humanities. She is a past president of the American Association for the Advancement of Slavic Studies and the American Association for Slavic and Eastern European Studies. In 2002, she received an award from the Mellon Foundation for her academic work. From September 1996 to December 2006, Fitzpatrick was co-editor of The Journal of Modern History with John W. Boyer and Jan E. Goldstein. In 2012, Fitzpatrick received both the award for Distinguished Contributions to Slavic, East European, and Eurasian Studies from the Association for Slavic, East European and Eurasian Studies, and the American Historical Association's award for Scholarly Distinction, [4] the highest honour awarded in historical studies in the United States. [5] In 2016, Fitzpatrick won the Prime Minister's Award for non-fiction for her book On Stalin's Team: The Years of Living Dangerously in Soviet Politics (2015). [6]

She spent fifty years living outside Australia. This included periods in Britain, the Soviet Union, [5] and twenty years in the United States, before moving back to Australia in 2012. [7] She won the 2012 Magarey Medal for biography for her memoir My Father's Daughter: Memories of an Australian Childhood. [8] A second volume of her memoirs A Spy in the Archives was published in 2013. In 2017, Fitzpatrick published a memoir-biography of her late husband Michael Danos, Mischka's War: A European Odyssey of the 1940s, which was short-listed for the Prime Minister's Award for non-fiction in 2018. [9] In addition to her research, she plays the violin in orchestras and chamber music groups. [5]

Fitzpatrick has been awarded Discovery Grants by the Australian Research Council for joint projects in 2010 with Stephen G. Wheatcroft for Rethinking the History of Soviet Stalinism, in 2013 with Mark Edele for War and Displacement: From the Soviet Union to Australia in the Wake of the Second World War, and in 2016 with Ruth Balint and Jayne Persian for Postwar Russian Displaced Persons arriving in Australia via the China Route. [5] Since her return to Australia, in addition to continuing her research and writing on Soviet history, such as On Stalin's Team: The Years of Living Dangerously in Soviet Politics, [10] [11] Fitzpatrick has been working and publishing on Australian immigration, particularly displaced persons after World War II and during the Cold War, [7] such as White Russians, Red Peril: A Cold War History of Migration to Australia. [12] [13] [14]

Research

Writing in The American Historical Review , Roberta T. Manning reviewed Fitzpatrick's work, stating: "In the late 1970s and early 1980s, Sheila Fitzpatrick almost singlehandedly created the field of Soviet social history with an impressive series of pioneering, now classic studies: The Cultural Revolution in Russia, 1928–1931 (1978), Education and Social Mobility in the Soviet Union, 1921–1934 (1979), and The Russian Revolution (1982). Book after book opened entirely new areas of research, explored old subjects from new perspectives, and forever altered the way experts perceived the USSR between 1917 and the outbreak of World War II." [15]

Her research focuses on the social and cultural history of the Stalinist period, particularly on aspects of social identity and daily life, and the social and cultural changes in Soviet Russia of the 1950s and 1960s. In her early works, she focused on the theme of social mobility, suggesting that the opportunity for the working class to rise socially and as a new elite had been instrumental in legitimizing the regime during the Stalinist period. [16] [17] [18] Despite its brutality, Stalinism as a political culture would have achieved the goals of a democratic revolution. The center of attention was always focused on the victims of the purges rather than its beneficiaries, as thousands of workers and communists who had access to the technical colleges during the first five-year plan received promotions to positions in industry, government, and the leadership of the All-Union Communist Party (Bolsheviks) as a consequence of the Great Purge. [19] For Fitzpatrick, the "cultural revolution" of the late 1920s and the purges which shook the scientific, literary, artistic, and the industrial communities is explained in part by a class struggle against executives and intellectual bourgeois. The men who rose in the 1930s played an active role to get rid of former leaders who blocked their own promotion, and the Great Turn found its origins in initiatives from the bottom rather than the decisions of the summit. [20] In this vision, Stalinist policy was based on social forces and offered a response to popular radicalism, which allowed the existence of a partial consensus between the regime and society in the 1930s. [19]

In Beyond Totalitarianism: Stalinism and Nazism Compared, Fitzpatrick and Michael Geyer disputed the concept of totalitarianism, stating that it entered political discourse first as a term of self-description by the Italian Fascists and was only later used as a framework to compare Nazi Germany with the Soviet Union, which were not as monolithic or as ideology-driven as they seemed. Without calling them "totalitarian", they identified their common features, including genocide, an all-powerful party, a charismatic leader, and pervasive invasion of privacy; however, they stated that Nazism and Stalinism did not represent a new and unique type of government but rather can be placed in the broader context of the turn to dictatorship in Europe in the interwar period. The reason they appear extraordinary is because they were the "most prominent, most hard-headed, and most violent" of the European dictatorships of the 20th century. They stated they are comparable because of their "shock and awe" and sheer ruthlessness but underneath superficial similarities were fundamentally different, and "when it comes to one-on-one comparison, the two societies and regimes may as well have hailed from different worlds." [21]

Historiographical debates

Academic Sovietology after World War II and during the Cold War was dominated by the "totalitarian model" of the Soviet Union, [22] stressing the absolute nature of Joseph Stalin's power. [23] The "revisionist school" beginning in the 1960s focused on relatively autonomous institutions which might influence policy at the higher level. [24] Matt Lenoe described the "revisionist school" as representing those who "insisted that the old image of the Soviet Union as a totalitarian state bent on world domination was oversimplified or just plain wrong. They tended to be interested in social history and to argue that the Communist Party leadership had had to adjust to social forces." [25] Fitzpatrick was one of a number of "revisionist school" historians who challenged the traditional approach to Soviet history, as outlined by political scientist Carl Joachim Friedrich, which stated that the Soviet Union was a totalitarian system, with the personality cult, and almost unlimited powers of the "great leader" such as Stalin. [26] [27]

As the leader of the second generation of the "revisionist school", or "revisionist historians", Fitzpatrick was the first to call the group of historians working on Soviet history in the 1980s "a new cohort of [revisionist school] historians." Fitzpatrick called for a social history that did not address political issues and adhered strictly to a "from below" viewpoint. This was justified by the idea that the university had been strongly conditioned to see everything through the prism of the state, hence "the social processes unrelated to the intervention of the state is virtually absent from the literature." [28] Fitzpatrick did not deny that the state's role in social change of the 1930s was huge and defended the practice of social history "without politics", as most young "revisionist school" historians did not want to separate the social history of the Soviet Union from the evolution of the political system. [19] Fitzpatrick explained that in the 1980s, when the "totalitarian model" was still widely used, "it was very useful to show that the model had an inherent bias and it did not explain everything about Soviet society. Now, whereas a new generation of academics considers sometimes as self evident that the totalitarian model was completely erroneous and harmful, it is perhaps more useful to show than there were certain things about the Soviet company that it explained very well." [29]

Bibliography

Books

Articles

Book reviews

YearReview articleWork(s) reviewed
2014Fitzpatrick, Sheila (September 2014). "'One of Us': The Spy Who Relished Deception". Australian Book Review . 364: 27–28. Macintyre, Ben (2014). A Spy Among Friends: Kim Philby and the Great Betrayal. Bloomsbury Publishing. ISBN   9781408851739.
2020Fitzpatrick, Sheila (6 February 2020). "Which Face? Emigrés on the Make". London Review of Books . 42 (3): 7–9.Tromly, Benjamin (2019). Cold War Exiles and the CIA: Plotting to Free Russia. Oxford University Press. ISBN   9780198840404.
Reddaway, Peter (2020). The Dissidents: A Memoir of Working with the Resistance in Russia, 1960–90. Brookings Institution. ISBN   9780815737735.
2020Fitzpatrick, Sheila (10 September 2020). "Whatever Made Him". London Review of Books . 42 (17): 9–11. Wagner, Izabela (2020). Bauman: A Biography. Polity. ISBN   9781509526864.
2021Fitzpatrick, Sheila (January–February 2021). "Knotty problems : an examination of Europe's displaced persons". Australian Book Review. 428: 12, 14. Nasaw, David (2020). The last million : Europe's displaced persons from World War to Cold War. Allen Lane.

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Leninism</span> Political theory developed by Vladimir Lenin

Leninism is a political ideology developed by Russian Marxist revolutionary Vladimir Lenin that proposes the establishment of the dictatorship of the proletariat led by a revolutionary vanguard party as the political prelude to the establishment of communism. Lenin's ideological contributions to the Marxist ideology relate to his theories on the party, imperialism, the state, and revolution. The function of the Leninist vanguard party is to provide the working classes with the political consciousness and revolutionary leadership necessary to depose capitalism.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Marxism–Leninism</span> Communist ideology developed by Joseph Stalin

Marxism–Leninism is a communist ideology that became the largest faction of the communist movement in the world in the years following the October Revolution. It was the predominant ideology of most communist governments throughout the 20th century. It was developed in Russia by Joseph Stalin and drew on elements of Bolshevism, Leninism, Marxism, and the works of Karl Kautsky. It was the state ideology of the Soviet Union, Soviet satellite states in the Eastern Bloc, and various countries in the Non-Aligned Movement and Third World during the Cold War, as well as the Communist International after Bolshevization.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Stalinism</span> Political and economic policies implemented by Joseph Stalin

Stalinism is the totalitarian means of governing and Marxist–Leninist policies implemented in the Soviet Union (USSR) from 1924 to 1953 by dictator Joseph Stalin and in Soviet satellite states between 1944 and 1953. Stalin had previously made a career as a gangster and robber, working to fund revolutionary activities, before eventually becoming General Secretary of the Soviet Union. Stalinism included the creation of a one man totalitarian police state, rapid industrialization, the theory of socialism in one country, forced collectivization of agriculture, intensification of class conflict, a cult of personality, and subordination of the interests of foreign communist parties to those of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, which Stalinism deemed the leading vanguard party of communist revolution at the time. After Stalin's death and the Khrushchev Thaw, a period of de-Stalinization began in the 1950s and 1960s, which caused the influence of Stalin's ideology to begin to wane in the USSR.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Totalitarianism</span> Extreme form of authoritarianism

Totalitarianism is a political system and a form of government that prohibits opposition political parties, disregards and outlaws the political claims of individual and group opposition to the state, and controls the public sphere and the private sphere of society. In the field of political science, totalitarianism is the extreme form of authoritarianism, wherein all socio-political power is held by a dictator, who also controls the national politics and the peoples of the nation with continual propaganda campaigns that are broadcast by state-controlled and by friendly private mass communications media.

<i>The Origins of Totalitarianism</i> Book by Hannah Arendt examining Nazism and Stalinism

The Origins of Totalitarianism, published in 1951, was Hannah Arendt's first major work, where she describes and analyzes Nazism and Stalinism as the major totalitarian political movements of the first half of the 20th century.

Soviet and communist studies, or simply Soviet studies, is the field of regional and historical studies on the Soviet Union and other communist states, as well as the history of communism and of the communist parties that existed or still exist in some form in many countries, both inside and outside the former Eastern Bloc, such as the Communist Party USA. Aspects of its historiography have attracted debates between historians on several topics, including totalitarianism and Cold War espionage.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">First five-year plan (Soviet Union)</span> Economic policy of the Soviet Union from 1928 to 1932

The first five-year plan of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) was a list of economic goals, implemented by Communist Party General Secretary Joseph Stalin, based on his policy of socialism in one country. Leon Trotsky had delivered a joint report to the April Plenum of the Central Committee in 1926 which proposed a program for national industrialisation and the replacement of annual plans with five-year plans. His proposals were rejected by the Central Committee majority which was controlled by the troika and derided by Stalin at the time. Stalin's version of the five-year plan was implemented in 1928 and took effect until 1932.

Kremlinology is the study and analysis of the politics and policies of the Soviet Union while Sovietology is the study of politics and policies of both the Soviet Union and former communist states more generally. These two terms were synonymous until the dissolution of the Soviet Union. In an extended usage, Kremlinology is sometimes used to mean any attempt to understand a secretive organization or process, such as plans for upcoming products or events, by interpreting indirect clues.

John Archibald Getty III is an American historian and professor at the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), who specializes in the history of Russia and the history of the Soviet Union.

Decrees were legislative acts of the highest Soviet institutions, primarily of the Council of People's Commissars and of VTsIK, issued between 1917 and 1924. Such acts issued after 1924 are referred to as Decisions or Ukases in Soviet sources.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Historiography of the Cold War</span>

As soon as the term "Cold War" was popularized to refer to postwar tensions between the United States and the Soviet Union, interpreting the course and origins of the conflict became a source of heated controversy among historians, political scientists and journalists. In particular, historians have sharply disagreed as to who was responsible for the breakdown of Soviet Union–United States relations after the World War II and whether the conflict between the two superpowers was inevitable, or could have been avoided. Historians have also disagreed on what exactly the Cold War was, what the sources of the conflict were and how to disentangle patterns of action and reaction between the two sides. While the explanations of the origins of the conflict in academic discussions are complex and diverse, several general schools of thought on the subject can be identified. Historians commonly speak of three differing approaches to the study of the Cold War: "orthodox" accounts, "revisionism" and "post-revisionism". However, much of the historiography on the Cold War weaves together two or even all three of these broad categories and more recent scholars have tended to address issues that transcend the concerns of all three schools.

Red fascism is a term equating Stalinism and other variants of Marxism–Leninism with fascism. Accusations that the leaders of the Soviet Union during the Stalin era acted as "red fascists" have come from left-wing figures who identified as anarchists, left communists, social democrats and other democratic socialists, as well as liberals, and among right-wing circles both closer to and further from the centre. The comparison of Nazism and Stalinism is controversial in academia.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Comparison of Nazism and Stalinism</span> Comparison of totalitarian ideologies

Various historians and other authors have carried out a comparison of Nazism and Stalinism, with particular consideration to the similarities and differences between the two ideologies and political systems, the relationship between the two regimes, and why both came to prominence simultaneously. During the 20th century, comparisons of Nazism and Stalinism were made on totalitarianism, ideology, and personality cult. Both regimes were seen in contrast to the liberal democratic Western world, emphasising the similarities between the two.

Soviet democracy, also called council democracy, is a type of democracy in Marxism, in which the rule of a population is exercised by directly elected soviets. Soviets are directly responsible to their electors and bound by their instructions using a delegate model of representation. Such an imperative mandate is in contrast to a trustee model, in which elected delegates are exclusively responsible to their conscience. Delegates may accordingly be dismissed from their post at any time through recall elections. Soviet democracy forms the basis for the soviet republic system of government.

The anti-Stalinist left is a term that refers to various kinds of Marxist political movements that oppose Joseph Stalin, Stalinism, Neo-Stalinism and the system of governance that Stalin implemented as leader of the Soviet Union between 1924 and 1953. This term also refers to the high ranking political figures and governmental programs that opposed Joseph Stalin and his form of communism, such as Leon Trotsky and other traditional Marxists within the Left Opposition. In Western historiography, Stalin is considered one of the worst and most notorious figures in modern history.

This is a select bibliography of post-World War II English-language books and journal articles about Stalinism and the Stalinist era of Soviet history. Book entries have references to journal reviews about them when helpful and available. Additional bibliographies can be found in many of the book-length works listed below.

<i>Stalins Peasants</i> Book about Stalinist agricultural collectivization in the 1930s

Stalin's Peasants or Stalin's Peasants: Resistance and Survival in the Russian Village after Collectivization is a book by the Soviet scholar and historian Sheila Fitzpatrick first published in 1994 by Oxford University Press. It was released in 1996 in a paperback edition and reissued in 2006 by Oxford University Press. Sheila Fitzpatrick is the Bernadotte E. Schmitt Distinguished Service Professor (Emeritus), Department of History, University of Chicago.

<i>Everyday Stalinism</i> Book about Stalinist urbanization and industrialization in the 1930s

Everyday Stalinism or Everyday Stalinism: Ordinary Life in Extraordinary Times: Soviet Russia in the 1930s is a book by Australian academic Sheila Fitzpatrick first published in 1999 by Oxford University Press and in paperback in 2000. Sheila Fitzpatrick is the Bernadotte E. Schmitt Distinguished Service Professor (Emeritus), Department of History, University of Chicago.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Bibliography of works about communism</span>

Below is a list of post World War II scholarly books and journal articles written in or translated into English about communism. Items on this list should be considered a non-exhaustive list of reliable sources related to the theory and practice of communism in its different forms.

References

  1. ↑ "Fitzpatrick, Brian Charles (1905–1965)". Australian Dictionary of Biography. National Centre of Biography, Australian National University.
  2. ↑ "Fitzpatrick, Sheila Mary - Woman - the Encyclopedia of Women and Leadership in Twentieth-Century Australia".
  3. ↑ Reports of the President and of the Treasurer. John Simon Guggenheim Memorial Foundation. 1987. p. 34.
  4. ↑ "Award for Scholarly Distinction Recipients". Historians.org. American Historical Association. Retrieved 2 August 2021.
  5. 1 2 3 4 "Fitzpatrick, Sheila Mary (1941 – )". The Encyclopedia of Women and Leadership in Twentieth-Century Australia. University of Melbourne (The Australian Women's Register). Retrieved 2 August 2021.
  6. ↑ "On Stalin's Team: the Years of Living Dangerously in Soviet Politics". Office for the Arts, Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Communications. 7 November 2016. Retrieved 8 September 2017.
  7. 1 2 "Professor Sheila Fitzpatrick". University of Sydney. Retrieved 2 August 2021.
  8. ↑ "Magarey Medal – Previous Winners". The Australian Historical Association. Retrieved 8 September 2017.
  9. ↑ "2018 shortlists announced!". Office for the Arts, Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Communications. Retrieved 8 September 2017.
  10. ↑ Legvold, Robert (May–June 2016). "On Stalin's Team: The Years of Living Dangerously in Soviet Politics". Foreign Affairs. Retrieved 2 August 2021.
  11. ↑ Whitewood, Peter (4 March 2017). "On Stalin's Team: The Years of Living Dangerously in Soviet Politics, written by Sheila Fitzpatrick". Brill. Retrieved 2 August 2021.
  12. ↑ "White Russians, Red Peril". Australian Catholic University. 15 April 2021. Retrieved 2 August 2021. Making use of newly discovered Russian-language archives and drawing on a lifetime's study of Soviet history and politics, Professor Fitzpatrick examines the early years of a diverse Russian-Australian community and how Australian and Soviet intelligence agencies attempted to track and influence them. While anti-communist 'White' Russians dreamed a war of liberation would overthrow the Soviet regime, a dissident minority admired its achievements and thought of returning home.
  13. ↑ Macintyre, Stuart (May 2021). "A complex mosaic: The early years of a diverse Russian-Australian community". Australian Book Review. Retrieved 2 August 2021.
  14. ↑ Beddie, Francesca (1 June 2021). "White Russians, Red Peril: A Cold War History of Migration to Australia by Sheila Fitzpatrick". Historians.org. American Historical Association. Retrieved 2 August 2021.
  15. ↑ Manning, Roberta T. (2000). "Reviewed Work: Everyday Stalinism: Ordinary Life in Extraordinary Times; Soviet Russia in the 1930s by Sheila Fitzpatrick". The American Historical Review. 105 (5): 1839. doi:10.2307/2652201. JSTOR   2652201.
  16. ↑ Fitzpatrick, Sheila (1979). Education and Social Mobility in the Soviet Union, 1921–1934. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi : 10.1017/CBO9780511523595. ISBN   9780511523595.
  17. ↑ Fitzpatrick, Sheila (September 1979). "Stalin and the Making of a New Elite, 1928–1939". Slavic Review . 38 (3): pp. 377–402. doi : 10.2307/2496711. At p. 38.
  18. ↑ Fitzpatrick, Sheila (Spring 1984). "The Russian Revolution and Social Mobility: A Reexamination of the Question of Social Support for the Soviet Regime in the 1920s and 1930s". Politics and Society . 13 (2): 119–141. doi : 10.1177/003232928401300201. At p. 13.
  19. 1 2 3 Karlsson, Klas-Göran (2008). "Revisionism". In Karlsson, Klas-Göran; Schoenhals, Michael. Crimes Against Humanity Under Communist Regimes – Research Review. Stockholm: Forum for Living History. pp. 29–33. ISBN   9789197748728.
  20. ↑ Fitzpatrick, Sheila, ed. (1978). Cultural Revolution in Russia, 1928–1931. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. ISBN   978-0253203373.
  21. ↑ Geyer, Michael; Fitzpatrick, Sheila (2009). Beyond Totalitarianism: Stalinism and Nazism Compared. Cambridge University Press. pp. 3–4, 8–12, 17–19. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511802652. ISBN   978-0-521-72397-8.
  22. ↑ Davies, Sarah; Harris, James (8 September 2005). "Joseph Stalin: Power and Ideas". Stalin: A New History. Cambridge University Press. p. 3. ISBN   978-1-139-44663-1. Academic Sovietology, a child of the early Cold War, was dominated by the 'totalitarian model' of Soviet politics. Until the 1960s it was almost impossible to advance any other interpretation, in the USA at least.
  23. ↑ Davies, Sarah; Harris, James (8 September 2005). "Joseph Stalin: Power and Ideas". Stalin: A New History. Cambridge University Press. pp. 3–4. ISBN   978-1-139-44663-1. In 1953, Carl Friedrich characterised totalitarian systems in terms of five points: an official ideology, control of weapons and of media, use of terror, and a single mass party, 'usually under a single leader'. There was of course an assumption that the leader was critical to the workings of totalitarianism: at the apex of a monolithic, centralised, and hierarchical system, it was he who issued the orders which were fulfilled unquestioningly by his subordinates.
  24. ↑ Davies, Sarah; Harris, James (8 September 2005). "Joseph Stalin: Power and Ideas". Stalin: A New History. Cambridge University Press. pp. 4–5. ISBN   978-1-139-44663-1. Tucker's work stressed the absolute nature of Stalin's power, an assumption which was increasingly challenged by later revisionist historians. In his Origins of the Great Purges, Arch Getty argued that the Soviet political system was chaotic, that institutions often escaped the control of the centre, and that Stalin's leadership consisted to a considerable extent in responding, on an ad hoc basis, to political crises as they arose. Getty's work was influenced by political science of the 1960s onwards, which, in a critique of the totalitarian model, began to consider the possibility that relatively autonomous bureaucratic institutions might have had some influence on policy-making at the highest level.
  25. ↑ Lenoe, Matt (2002). "Did Stalin Kill Kirov and Does It Matter?". The Journal of Modern History. 74 (2): 352–380. doi:10.1086/343411. ISSN   0022-2801. S2CID   142829949.
  26. ↑ Davies, Sarah; Harris, James (8 September 2005). Stalin: A New History. Cambridge University Press. pp. 3–5. ISBN   978-1-139-44663-1.
  27. ↑ Sheila, Fitzpatrick (2007). "Revisionism in Soviet History". History and Theory. 46 (4): 77–91. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2303.2007.00429.x. ISSN   1468-2303. ... the Western scholars who in the 1990s and 2000s were most active in scouring the new archives for data on Soviet repression were revisionists (always 'archive rats') such as Arch Getty and Lynne Viola.
  28. ↑ Fitzpatrick, Sheila (October 1986). "New Perspectives on Stalinism". The Russian Review. 45 (4): 357–373. JSTOR   130466. Quotes at pp. 358–359.
  29. ↑ Fitzpatrick, Sheila (October 1986). "Afterword: Revisionism Revisited". The Russian Review. 45 (4): 409–413. JSTOR   130471. Quotes at pp. 409–410.
  30. ↑ Translated into Italian and Spanish.
  31. ↑ "Sheila Fitzpatrick The Shortest History of the Soviet Union". YouTube. Trinity College, Cambridge. 23 November 2022.

Further reading

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.