Homo Sovieticus

Product Information

Homo sovieticus is accustomed to live in relatively bad conditions, is ready to face difficulties, constantly expects the worst; approves of the actions of the authorities; seeks to prevent those who violate habitual forms of behavior, fully supports the leadership; has a standard ideologized consciousness; a sense of responsibility for his country; is ready to sacrifice and is ready to condemn others to sacrifice. Almost three decades after the collapse of the Soviet Union, today more often than ever, global media and intellectuals rely on the concept of homo sovieticus to explain Russia's authoritarian ills. Homo sovieticus - or the Soviet man - is understood to be a double-thinking, suspicious and fearful conformist with no morality, an innate obedience to authority and no public demands; they have been forged in the fires of the totalitarian conditions in which they find themselves.

Facts & Figures Annual statistics from "Baltic Films" - co-operation platform of the national film institutions in Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania.

Homo sovieticus was a „czlowiek zrodzony przez warunki istnienia komunistycznego (socjalistycznego) spoleczenstwa, bedacy nosicielem zasad istnienia tego spoleczenstwa, samym swoim osposobem zycia zachowujacy stosunki wewnatrz-kolektywne tego spoleczenstwa.” (Tischner 1992) Upon arrival on Russia's political scene, Vladimir Putin made it seem as if there was nothing wrong with being Russian or a former Soviet citizen. Furthermore, Putin validated early on the feelings of millions of people who regarded the dissolution of the Soviet Union to be one of "the greatest geopolitical catastrophes of the century". The following strengthening of the power vertical and the State becoming again a paternalist caretaker of its citizens under Putin's rule just hit home for most of the Russian population who did not know any better. Historian Stephen Wheatcroft states that Soviet peasantry were subject to cultural destruction in the creation of the New Soviet man. [26]

Indifference to common property and to petty theft from the workplace, either for personal use or for profit. [7] A line from a popular song, "Everything belongs to the kolkhoz, everything belongs to me" (" всё теперь колхозное, всё теперь моё" / vsyo teperь kolkhoznoe, vsyo teperь moyo), meaning that people on collective farms treasured all common property as their own, was sometimes used ironically to refer to instances of petty theft: "Take from the plant every nail, you are the owner here, not a guest" (" Тащи с завода каждый гвоздь - ты здесь хозяин, а не гость" / taschi s zavoda kazhdyj gvozd' - ty zdes' hozyain, a ne gost').Zinovyev explains that Westerners use "Homo Sovieticus" in a sarcastic way and reinforces it by adding his own description of the Soviet Man: "Look at this (Soviet Man)! He is smart and educated. Nobody fooled him, intimidated him, or corrupted him. Rather, on the contrary, he himself did this to other people, who, however, do not consider themselves fooled, intimidated, orcorrupted.In general, there is no need to subject Soviet people to such treatment, since they themselves are capable of fooling, intimidating, and corrupting anyone." What makes so many Russians numb to the suffering of Ukrainians or even their own hardships emerging because of the war? Barbara Evans Clements. The Birth of the New Soviet Woman. Washington, D.C.: Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars; Kennan Institute Occasional Paper Series #140, 1981. Historian Mikhail Geller defined homo sovieticus as a set of qualities and character traits characteristic of all Soviet people in varying proportions. According to Geller, the Soviet-type system, carrying out "social training", promotes the development, growth and dominance of these qualities. Geller listed the following features of the "Soviet man", as they were officially described by the Soviet ideology: the primary importance of work; boundless devotion to the Motherland; membership in the collective; constant interest in the life of neighbors, from housemates to neighbors on the planet; the state takes full care of this person. Geller believed that if you remove the advertising rhetoric, then these features completely coincide with the description of Zinoviev, and cited the following version of the text from the book "Homo Sovieticus": [10] [11] Gdy moze, zdolny jest do kazdego dobrego uczynku, jezeli zostanie on wlasciwie oceny przez kolektyw lub kierownictwo. Homosos jest istota, z której z zaleznosci od potrzeby i sytuacji - mozna ulepic wszelkie pozadanie spolecznie postacie. Jest uniwersalnym materialem dla przyszlej, historycznej tworczosci rodzaja ludzkiego.” (Zinoviev, 1984)

ERR News is the English-language service of Estonian Public Broadcasting, run by a fully independent editorial team. The origins of the term appear to be somewhat obscure, but it is often associated with the book entitled Homo Sovieticus, published in 1981 by the Soviet philosopher Alexander Zinoviev. Zinoviev was stripped of his citizenship and deported from the USSR for his dissident activities. The book is certainly a fun read, a lengthy exercise in sad irony, with multiple witty comments, repeatedly comparing and contrasting the Soviet and Western lifestyles. However, it is hardly a scientific undertaking. The film's director Ivo Briedis and the journalist Rita Ruduša were both born in the Soviet Union. Together, they embark on a journey to explore the phenomenon of HOMO SOVIETICUS. They want to know if a totalitarian mindset can still be found in countries that were formerly part of the Soviet Union. Image: Mistrus Media Levada put notions about the ‘simple Soviet man’ on an empirical foundation when he took over the All-Union Center for Public Opinion Research in the late 80s, as part of Gorbachev’s effort to enlist the social sciences in reforming the Soviet system. At the time, many members of the intelligentsia were decrying Russians’ degradation as a means of calling for change. Levada’s research combined concerns about the Soviet Union’s debased inhabitants (referred to in ironic domestic parlance as the ‘sovok’) with approaches derived from Talcott Parsons’ social systems theory. Levada discovered the cowering practitioner of doublethink that he had set out to find, while expressing confidence that this figure would die out along with the Soviet state.Many Westerners and ex-Soviets (the ones younger or simply fortunate to be better oriented in matters of history and truth) scoff at the Homo Sovieticus for possessing the naivete of a blind kitten. Not Alexievich. There isn’t an ounce of ridicule in her approach. Instead, there is a profoundly humanist understanding of immeasurable loss and confusion, of deracinated personhood, and of a perpetually shifting system of ideological coordinates that only amplifies this disorientation. At work you say one thing, at home another, you pretend to do your job, your employer pretends to pay you, in public you pretend to be atheist while at home you teach your kids to say the namaz, and on and on it goes, this neverending umbilical cord of duplicity, chaining a person to the regime of lies. The latest Levada polls demonstrate that the number of supporters of the war in Ukraine come to around 70 percent. Mr. Putin continues to be the most popular political figure after all that has happened. Meanwhile, 59 percent of respondents think that they do not bear any personal responsibility for the destruction and civilians' suffering in Ukraine. How Soviet scientists and pseudoscientists pursued telepathic research, cybernetic simulations, and mass hypnotism over television to control the minds of citizens. There were gains made in combating illiteracy and promoting education for women during the 1920s. Soviet policy encouraged working-class women to attend school and develop vocational skills. There existed opportunities for women to participate in politics, become party members and vie for elected and administrative positions. Access to the political sphere, however, was extremely limited. [22]

Homosos jest najbardziej charakterystycznym i adekwatnym ucielesnieniem samej istoty nowego komunistycznego spoleczenstwa.” (Zinoviev, 1984) Yet, this is not the full picture. We know that patterns of behavior can alter depending on the specific institutional settings. That is a commonplace sociological observation. Thus, post-Soviet people tend to do quite well when placed in a different social environment, let’s say, as a result of their emigration to the West. The homo sovieticus, it seems, vanishes without a trace in the Silicon Valley and the Bay Area. Russia was much freer in the 1990s than it became under Mr Putin. But the change was gradual rather than sudden, and was based on a relationship between money and power inherited from a previous era. The privatisations of the 1990s put property in the hands of the Soviet officialdom and a small group of Russian oligarchs. As Kirill Rogov, a historian and analyst, has observed, the real problem was not that the accumulation of capital was unfair—it usually is—but that clear rules of competition and a mechanism for transferring property from less to more efficient owners were never established.Józef Tischner (2005). Etyka solidarności oraz Homo sovieticus (in Polish). Kraków: Znak. p.295. ISBN 83-240-0588-9. Join us after the film for a panel discussion about this phenomenon and its repercussions on contemporary geopolitics. Filmmakers Ivo Briedis and Rita Ruduša will be joined by Craig Kennedy, from the Harvard University’s Davis Center of Russian and Eurasian Studies, and filmmaker Darya Zhuk. Moderated by Daris Dēliņš. From its roots in the mid 19th and early 20th century, proponents of communism have postulated that within the new society of pure communism and the social conditions therein, a New Man and New Woman would develop with qualities reflecting surrounding circumstances of post-scarcity and unprecedented scientific development. [3] Among Mr Putin's rediscovered Soviet symbols, none is more important than that of Russia as a great power surrounded by enemies. Having promoted a version of history in which Stalin represents Russia's greatness (his repressions just an unfortunate side-effect of a cold war forced upon him by America), Mr Putin has employed one of Stalinism's favourite formulas: Russia as an isolated and besieged fortress.