|Ideolodies of Karl Marx & Frederick Engels||Bolsheviks' Views on Family||Stalin's Coming to Power||Mothers' Hardships|
[The family] will be sent to a museum of antiquities so that it can rest next to the spinning wheel and the bronze axe, by the horsedrawn carriage, the steam engine, and the wired telephone.
S.Ia.Vol’fson, 1929, Soviet sociologist
In 1928, afteryears of unrest, Russia embraced a new leader Iosef Vissarionovich Dzhugashvili, better known as Joseph Stalin. His leadership brought numerous political, social and economic changes, and the reformation of a family structure was among them. Stalin aimed to strengthen Soviet families and give mothers more responsibilities in rearing their children. These views significantly differed from the views of the earlier Socialist ideologists, such as Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, two nineteenth-century German philosophers, who were the founders of the socialist movement. They had argued that the concept of family was obsolete and proposed a new family structure based on the state’s supervision and support. This ideology was widely accepted by the Bolsheviks, who took it even further, arguing that in the social state, families would "wither away," freeing mothers from household work and allowing them to participate in the "building of socialism." Yet Stalin’s vision of a strong family was directed towards minimizing the state’s spending on social programs during the years of industrialization and World War II. And, although this goal was achieved, many families fell apart, and mothers faced great economic and social hardships raising their children.
In order to understand the basic structure of the Soviet family and role of mothers in it, it is necessary to look into the origins of Soviet ideology, which found its roots in the works of Karl Marx and Frederick Engels. In The German Ideology, Marx and Engels introduced a utopian idea of a proletarian family as "a prototype of future social relations" (Goldman, 34). This idea promoted family unions based on mutual affection of the spouses towards each other, unlike nineteenth-century bourgeois marriages, which were allegedly based on property. This idea of a marriage based on love and affection between two proletarian individuals, who usually lacked any private property, appeared in many of Marx’s and Engels’ other works, such as Principles of Communism (1847), Draft of a Communist Confession of Faith (1847), Manifesto of the Communist Party (1848), and The Origins of the Family, Private Property, and the State (1884).
Furthermore, in their The German Ideology, Marx and Engels proposed the transfer of all domestic work done in individual households to the public or state sphere. They addressed the question of women’s household work, stating "that a communal domestic economy was a necessary prerequisite for women’s liberation" (Goldman, 33). This idea, although not clearly stated, assumed the ultimate "withering away" of individual families and presented a new image of a state as a big and happy family.
The concept of the "withering away" of the individual family was eagerly adopted by future generations of Soviet activists, the Bolsheviks, and was promoted by Lenin. Yet the Bolsheviks took this idea much further, arguing that children would be taken care of in state public nurseries, schools and childcare centers. The state would assume the parental role completely. And mothers were even encouraged to abandon "their narrow and irrational love for their children" (Goldman, 9). V.Diuchen, an educator, argued that "mothers did children more harm than good, for even ‘mother-pedagogues’ were incapable of approaching ‘their children with sufficient objectivity’" (Goldman, 9). Furthermore, in October 1918 the Central Executive Committee of the Soviet (VtsIK) passed a complete Code on Marriage, the Family, and Guardianship. Alexander Goikhbarg, the idealistic author of the Code, intended this document to "[prepare] the way for a time when ‘the fetters of husband and wife’ would become ‘obsolete’" (Goldman, 1). Goikhbarg and his fellow revolutionaries believed that socialism would resolve all problems regarding family and outside-the-house work. They had a vision that "the tasks performed by millions of individual unpaid women in their homes would be taken over by paid workers in communal dining rooms, laundries, and childcare centers" (Goldman, 3). However, when the new government under Stalin’s leadership replaced the existing one, these utopian ideas were almost completely abandoned - mothers were encouraged to actively participate in the raising of their children, therefore minimizing the state’s expenses on childcare.
With Stalin’s coming to power, the concept of family and motherhood became more stabilized. Parents were once again assigned the responsibility to care for their children. The state allocated resources to help mothers, especially those with numerous children. Bernice Madison, author of "Social Services for Women: Problems and Priorities," described the position of Russian mothers in 1935 in the following way: "To this end, it [the state] made modest family allowances available to mothers of large families; [and] expanded the network of socio-legal bureaus established in 1933 to assist mothers to deal with social problems" (Lapidus, 308). In addition, state programs included an increased number of preschools, improved care for handicapped and delinquent children, and some, although limited, foster care units. During the Second World War, these programs were not terminated, and in 1944, the government even introduced another Code of Family Law, which strengthened the importance of marriage and made divorces harder to obtain.
During Stalin’s leadership Russian families remained as entities supported by the state. However, Stalin’s plans, which included turning the family into a stable unit of society, were not only directed towards minimizing the governmental expenses: strong families now represented one of the many ways to control Soviet citizens politically. This meant that a strong family, in which members would be "more loyal to the state than to each other," would discourage people from any actions against the existing political order, therefore strengthening Stalin’s totalitarian regime (Shlapentokh, 25). Vladimir Shlapentokh, a professor of sociology at Michigan State University in East Lansing, wrote the following on Stalin’s views on a family: "Stalin, like other potentates, believed the stable family was an additional bond that weakened people’s inclination to opposition activity, made them seek material well-being, and so made them much more dependent on the state" (Shlapentokh, 25). Stalin’s idea of a family that was stable and dependent on the state was useful during the years of The Great Terror - mass purges that took place in the mid-thirties. As described in Solzhenitsyn’s The Gulag Archipelago, the purges touched each household in the Soviet Union. The police used family members as informers and even as witnesses against their relatives. Pavel Morozov may serve as an example of how strong and successful the state’s propaganda was regarding family members as informers. Morozov renounced his stigmatized parents, who were declared "the enemies of the people" and exiled into one of the many labor camps (gulags) existing in the country. Pavlik Morozov’s "heroic deed" inspired many young komsomols, who canonized Morozov as the patron saint of the komsomol.
Nevertheless, despite Stalin’s efforts to strengthen the family, in the late 1930s, during the time of great upheavals in the Soviet Union, families began to fall apart. Family bonds proved to be too fragile to withstand harsh social and economic changes as Stalin’s drastic attempts to bring the country to the same level of industrialization as the Western world, and the introduction of collectivization and the five-year plans took place. Already in the early 1930’s, the divorce rate began to rise to epidemic rates. Sheila Fitzpatrick, author of Everyday Stalinism: Ordinary Life in Extraordinary Times: Soviet Russia in the 1930s, wrote the following on the subject of divorce in the 1930s: "Millions of men left home during collectivization; some kept in touch with their families in the village, others did not. Divorce was easy "and in any case there was no pressure to register marriages" (Fitzpatrick, 139). Moreover, in the 1930’s many Russians viewed any type of serious relationship as marriage and were not eager to formally register their relationships. In fact, many "wives" complained to the authorities that their "husbands" were taking numerous "wives" in different cities, accusing their spouses of polygamy. Therefore, due to the fact that so many families were left without male breadwinners, women now had to fill the role of providers in the Soviet families.
To add to the fact that under Stalin’s government family structure deteriorated, mothers, especially single ones, had a very hard time raising their children due to intolerable economic and social conditions. From the late 1920s through the 1940’s food and consumer goods shortages were severe and chronic. Under the First Five-Year Plan (1929-32), all of the country’s resources were concentrated on the industrialization of the Soviet Union - "the top priority and consumer goods took a poor second place" (Fitzpatrick, 42). Throughout the USSR, mothers (for it was the job of the mothers to acquire food for the family) stood for hours and hours in bread lines during the years of famine in 1932 until 1940. One mother from Penza wrote to her daughter: "’There is an awful panic with bread here. Thousands of peasants are sleeping outside the bread stores. ...It went below freezing and seven people froze to death taking bread home’" (Fitzpatrick, 43). Another woman wrote to her husband from a Iaroslavl kolkhoz (a collective farm): "’We stand in line for bread from 12 o’clock at night, and they only give one kilogram, even if you are dying of hunger’" (Fitzpatrick, 43). Other consumer goods such as clothing, shoes and textiles were almost impossible to acquire as well. (Source of the Picture)
Furthermore, since all of the state’s resources were concentrated on the industrialization of the country during Stalin’s Five-Year Plans, no provision was made for residential housing construction. Yet the urban population of the Soviet Union in the 1930’s continued to grow, and soon the problem of overcrowding touched every Soviet family. In addition to that, most of the residential buildings were seized by the state, which allowed the authorities to manipulate the living conditions of every citizen. The statistics show that "in Moscow, average living space was 5.5 square meters per capita in 1930, dropping down to just over 4 square meters in 1940.... [In] Magnitogorsk and Irkutsk both had under 4 square meters, and in Krasnoiarsk the per capita norm in 1933 was a mere 3.4 square meters" (Fitzpatrick, 46). Under conditions such as these, mothers could not allocate enough time for their children, were often preoccupied with household work and sometimes worked outside the family. Moreover, the lack of housing was one of the key factors leading to child abandonment and neglect in the Soviet Union. Very often living in the overcrowded apartments, children would be abused by their parents as was in the case of Rosa Vasileva, a fourteen-year-old Moscow schoolgirl. In 1936 this child wrote to Stalin proposing a "child tax" paid by all Soviet citizens. The purpose of the tax was to protect children neglected and abused by their parents from the first days of their lives until their maturity at eighteen.
In addition, due to lack of proper housing conditions, the birth rate significantly declined during 1930’s and throughout the 1940’s. And, although the law of 1936 prohibited abortions, many women were forced to seek unauthorized abortions in order to prevent having a child in such deplorable conditions. One woman told a reporter: "My family lives with another family in a room of 30 meters. Have I the right to allow myself the luxury of bringing a second child into this environment? I think not" (Fitzpatrick, 153). Stories told by these women certainly prove that Stalin’s efforts to minimize the state’s expenses were successful; however too many men, women and children were harmed in the process to consider the changes brought by these efforts beneficial.
The family is one of the most important units of society. However it would be a very weak, unstable unit if it were not for women - wives and mothers, who held it together from generation to generation. In Soviet families during Joseph Stalin’s regime, mothers were especially under a greater deal of pressure to keep their families together, along with raising, feeding and clothing their children. With Stalin’s coming to power, all the utopian ideas on the subject of families and motherhood, that emerged in the works of Karl Marx and Frederick Engles decades earlier simply disappeared. There was nothing left of the Bolsheviks’ vision of families dissolving with time. Stalin was determined to recreate strong families as one of the methods to minimize state’s expenses and to keep people tied down and unable to resist his totalitarian regime. However, despite the introduction of various programs that were aimed to attract mothers back into their homes and back to their children, families proved to be unable to withstand horrible economic conditions and various political and social prosecutions, which were associated with Stalin’s government.
[Sociology of Marriage and Family]
Fitzpatrick, Sheila. Everyday Stalinism: Ordinary Life in Extraordinary Times: Soviet Russia in the 1930s. New York: Oxford University Press, 1999.
Goldman, Wendy Z. Women, the State, and Revolution: Soviet Family Policy and Social Life, 1917 - 1936. New York, USA: Cambridge University Press, 1993.
Lapidus, Gail, Dorothy Atkinson, and Alexander Dallin. Women in Russia. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press, 1977.
Shlapentokh, Vladimir. Love, Marriage, and Friendship in the Soviet Union: Ideals and Practices. New York: Praeger, 1984.