{"title":"THE ESTABLISHMENT OF SOVIET “SHARASHKAS” IN THE EARLY 1930S: REASONS, INSTITUTIONS, PERSONS","authors":"S. Krasilnikov","doi":"10.30759/1728-9718-2023-1(78)-74-83","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The problematic field of such a specific segment of forced labor as specialist design, technical departments and project bureaus which were created and operated under the OGPU auspices in the first half of the 1930s requires reinterpretation of its canonical research approaches. The paper considers the specific factors of the emergence of “sharashkas” network as an institutional manifestation and the result of stepped-up conservative subordination and forced exploitation by the Stalinist regime of the intellectual potential of the brainpower. The evolvement of the Special Bureaus was the embodiment of the basic characteristics of a mobilization-type campaign (the construct of “sabotage”, extraordinary measures of implementation, extensity, resource intensiveness, strife, unintended consequences). Throughout 1930–1934 imprisoned specialists became an object, a special accounting category and a target group for bureaucratic inter-agency negotiating between security and economic departments, and their deliverables were expropriated. The paradox of the full regime dependence of specialists on chekists and the inverse dependence of the latter on the results of the prisoners’ activities is observed. It is concluded that the established hybrid institution of regime labor comprised of all types of coexisting labor activity — service, compulsory, mobilization, forced — had no functional stability, prospects and capacity for selfdevelopment. An exception was the considered case of the creation of Design Bureau № 11 initiated by L. K. Ramzin, rearranged in 1934 into the Bureau of once-through boiler construction, which worked until the end of the Stalin era.","PeriodicalId":37813,"journal":{"name":"Ural''skij Istoriceskij Vestnik","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ural''skij Istoriceskij Vestnik","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.30759/1728-9718-2023-1(78)-74-83","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
Abstract
The problematic field of such a specific segment of forced labor as specialist design, technical departments and project bureaus which were created and operated under the OGPU auspices in the first half of the 1930s requires reinterpretation of its canonical research approaches. The paper considers the specific factors of the emergence of “sharashkas” network as an institutional manifestation and the result of stepped-up conservative subordination and forced exploitation by the Stalinist regime of the intellectual potential of the brainpower. The evolvement of the Special Bureaus was the embodiment of the basic characteristics of a mobilization-type campaign (the construct of “sabotage”, extraordinary measures of implementation, extensity, resource intensiveness, strife, unintended consequences). Throughout 1930–1934 imprisoned specialists became an object, a special accounting category and a target group for bureaucratic inter-agency negotiating between security and economic departments, and their deliverables were expropriated. The paradox of the full regime dependence of specialists on chekists and the inverse dependence of the latter on the results of the prisoners’ activities is observed. It is concluded that the established hybrid institution of regime labor comprised of all types of coexisting labor activity — service, compulsory, mobilization, forced — had no functional stability, prospects and capacity for selfdevelopment. An exception was the considered case of the creation of Design Bureau № 11 initiated by L. K. Ramzin, rearranged in 1934 into the Bureau of once-through boiler construction, which worked until the end of the Stalin era.
在20世纪30年代上半叶在OGPU主持下创建和运作的强迫劳动的特定部分,如专业设计,技术部门和项目局,这些问题领域需要重新解释其规范的研究方法。本文认为,“沙拉什卡”网络出现的具体因素是一种制度表现,是斯大林主义政权加强保守从属和强制剥削智力潜力的结果。特别局的演变体现了动员型运动的基本特征(“破坏”的构造、非常的执行措施、范围广泛、资源密集、冲突、意想不到的后果)。从1930年到1934年,被监禁的专家成为安全部门和经济部门之间官僚机构间谈判的对象、特殊会计类别和目标群体,他们的成果被没收。观察到专家对检查官的完全制度依赖和后者对囚犯活动结果的反向依赖的悖论。本文认为,由服务型、强制性、动员型、强迫型等多种劳动活动共同构成的混合型政权劳动制度缺乏功能稳定性、发展前景和自我发展能力。一个例外是由L. K. Ramzin发起的第11设计局的创建,该设计局于1934年改组为一次性锅炉建设局,一直工作到斯大林时代结束。
期刊介绍:
The Institute of History and Archaeology of the Ural Branch of RAS introduces the “Ural Historical Journal” — a quarterly magazine. Every issue contains publications on the central conceptual topic (e.g. “literary tradition”, “phenomenon of colonization”, “concept of Eurasianism”), a specific historical or regional topic, a discussion forum, information about academic publications, conferences and field research, jubilees and other important events in the life of the historians’ guild. All papers to be published in the Journal are subject to expert reviews. The editorial staff of the Journal invites research, members of academic community and educational institutions to cooperation as authors of the articles and information messages, as well as readers and subscribers to the magazine.