Memory production, vandalism, violence: Civil society and lessons from a short life of a monument to Stalin

On September 15th 2016, the leaders of youth group the “Russian Spirit,”2 unveiled a monument to Stalin in the Siberian city Surgut, located in central Russia. The bust was erected a few meters away from a display board, which states, “In some time at this place there will be a monument to the victims of Soviet Repressions.”3 Someone poured red paint over Stalin's bust twice and wrote “henchman” on the side. The first time vandalism occurred was the day after the installation. The local municipalities removed the monument three weeks after due to the absence of state authorization and also because the monument lacked “public toleration.” The defacement of the statue and the formulation of the city council of Surgut, triggered an inquiry on what is “public toleration” and how should one react to monuments of perpetrators in a public domain? Should the memorial exist, in the spirit of toleration of the views which disturb, outrage, and lack respect for the millions of victims? Or is the approach of the municipalities that banned the monument and the “good” civil society that repeatedly vandalized the monument appropriate? I argue for the latter. Traditionally, civil society is perceived as a “watchdog” of society, a guarantor of democracy, and as an inherently positive institution. This work calls for a reimagination of the role of civil society engaged with memory initiatives and argues that limits to toleration of “uncivil” civil society exist. We should not presume that civil society initiatives are always respectful of victims, tolerance, and diversity. An analysis of the qualities or “textures” and “temperature,” of civil society gives a more accurate picture of civil society operating in a particular milieu (Krygier, 2002). This work assesses the posts on social media, the official website of the organization “Russian Spirit,” newspaper articles, and secondary interviews from September 2015 (a date before the erection of the monument), to the present day to examine the qualities of the civil society. The paper first provides a working definition of the term “civil society.” I then examine the power dynamics behind memory politics through the history and historiography of memory production and the specifics of Stalinist and anti-Stalinist attitudes in the Soviet and post-Soviet Russia. This paper further outlines the characteristics of “uncivil” civil society. The work concludes by discussing potential paths of enduring revisionism, elaborating on the possibilities of toleration, resistance, condemning violence, and imposing restrictions through legal means. The definition of “civil society” is disputed and not static; it evolves and differs depending on the context and on the continually changing modes of participation and communication. The key characteristics, attributable to the concept of “civil society” as defined in the 19th century, are: “individuality, plurality, publicity” (Cohen & Arato, 1994, p. 14). The concept of “civil society” implies the realization of the social dimension but also of “individual development and ethical choice” (Cohen & Arato, 1994, p. 14). It also suggests that diverse groups of people form civil society and articulate their views publicly through the available communicative channels. The 20th century contributed to three primary attributes of civil society (Cohen & Arato, 1994). The first attribute relates to civil society as a site of contestation of ideas and contribution to the collective identity (Cohen & Arato, 1994). The second conveys that civil society also consists of “informal networks, initiatives and social movements” (Cohen & Arato, 1994, p. 14). The emphasis is put on detachment from the formal and institutionalized organizations. The third attribute relates to the development of the concept of “public sphere” as outlined by Habermas (1989). Thus, the deliberative and communicative functions of civil society were further developed (Cohen & Arato, 1994). This can be seen in the fact that modern democracies are based on the idea that the actions and policies formulated from “above” are subject to contestation and affirmation from “below.” This shift means that the citizens can question the practices of a government in public deliberative settings (Cohen & Arato, 1994). The scope of the concept of “civil society” is now broader, which enables new forms of civil society to appear and be recognized. Gready and Robins (2017) suggest that the notion of civil society should apply broadly to every type of collective action and should not be restricted to nongovernment organizations (NGOs) that focus on human rights. For a posttotalitarian context, an extended definition, which transcends the narrow understanding of civil society based on institutions and political activities, is essential due to the danger that the state might restrict traditional channels of operations of civil society through legal means. The term “civil society” has different meanings in the West and the postcommunist space. Civil society in the postcommunist countries is perceived in a strictly political, often oppositional, sense. In contrast, in the West, civil society is linked to associational life, as famously coined by Putnam (1995). Another tendency concerning civil society in the former republics of the Soviet Union is pointing to the “uncivil” nature of civil society, which increasingly has embarked on nationalism and populism (Kopecky & Mudde, 2003). These bleak prospects are due to the narrow definition of civil society and selective use of the term, which would include only “prodemocratic” civil society, leaving everything that does not meet this criterion, behind (Kopecky & Mudde, 2003). Kopecky and Mudde (2003) state that “uncivil” civil society in Eastern Europe is closer to the needs of the local people than the Western NGOs, which the authors call “virtual civil society” because they do not contribute to the democratization efforts locally but are driven by the global elite's interests. They exist only on paper rather than have any tangible effect (Kopecky & Mudde, 2003). Keeping the ambiguities and indecisiveness associated with “the much-contested but yet fashionable term” (Crocker, 2008, p. 500) “civil society” in mind, this work defines “civil society” as not state-run and noncommercial goals driven groups. The paper focuses on civil society that engages with memorization of the past and attempts of post-Soviet Russian society to overcome the legacies of the Soviet repressions. Following Habermas (1989), the essay deems the communicative dimension and the ability to transfer a message to the public sphere to be at the core of the concept of civil society. The activities of civil society can be dispersed in time and space. Although the “Russian Spirit” is not a registered group, and it does not represent a positive development as it endangers the “Russian Spirit” is a of civil society. The understanding of the term “civil society” is not of the of civil society in or the society is and the local question the of the new government In the state is civil society does not represent a to the the the civil society often the It is not a of a “good” state after and a civil society On the civil society at focus or the approach to the also engages in and of the monument to Stalin in Surgut, examine the actions of the “Russian Spirit” and the The “Russian Spirit” is an organization to be an of and as their website The official social on the Russian of that is the of of the The with to the of the by the group and of the to Stalin's on which the “Russian Spirit” is based on the of by the Soviet and post-Soviet for the Soviet it was for the The was for a of a the of as the of and a the of Stalin with first the 20th of the on and then the in were yet essential to the of the of was a which not and not in democratization of the The of was in the of Soviet for the memory of the was The of from Stalin's by the on of and was more of by p. This to and to for a for rather than to to the p. that was in by have on to in p. with to a of people power and Stalinist the of Stalinist and the victims were to the of p. with the on a of was with the of as as the of by the of and Soviet of the and the of the Soviet was a time people to the the Stalinist Stalin's a at that The Soviet was on the of and the as as in p. In the and before the of the in people were on the to and the of of the of the the Soviet policies in of the and of the or a a p. The by on in was one of the primary In this a of a of The was Stalin for to in by and the that the with the by on the of for the of and the power to of the p. The of a was on the of the of after the This the past to a people with p. The relates to the of past to that the of are p. It provides a of to in a that the is an in the as p. the production and the state and society at is the for to the a different form of efforts of an of and Soviet p. of the is of the of the as “the of the is “the of the is to the understanding of because it the the and society” 2016, p. The an society and that and it & p. p. that concerning is the of with the three institutions as of and “the and the the and the The to the identity and the is in “the political which of p. further the the of the history by which to Stalin as in a and by as the with the of for engaged in of history to the of is of the over the of history and memory of memory a of power is yet not the only In the Russian context, a for identity was one of the that memory For the and the were the only they The memory of the past the of “the past the which the attempts to present 2016, p. The of the Soviet Union for Russian citizens in an identity this the by the identity is linked to past the memory will not to the democratization as the memory and identity is on the shift of is an of by and how collective and memory by memory in different of media, and public The of memory are not or as a group or the three of victims and but the It is the over of and of people through means of and public which are by the by p. the more is with groups that a of rather than in the be of It is that in is not driven by or will and or the on the that will the by the state through any of The state over or group of The of the “Russian Spirit” the of the They have the political of West, of for in society, from and of The group focuses on “the of Russian and particular emphasis on identity not a but the to the and The group of notion of an and the over on and p. the “Russian Spirit” is available on their three it is not a registered group, they do not the of the for The of the group, is a of in and for a public organization and is a of the of An people the the monument to Stalin in Surgut, with of often for and of people in Soviet at the the red paint was poured on the removed the paint one removed the paint after the The monument the of Stalin with will be to the of history will it The away from the leaving Stalin's bust the with red paint on and an with The bust was in the of which has a rather of Stalin's and the of the bust was The for three of people for the the to the of the of the group, to the the of the monument with but the more to it by the of youth and argues that the policies do not always to the in one of the few people politics in the to was a of political of a from for of and for at an to the victims of the Soviet with a of The behind to the of was to that not Stalin's be a of political to the of the group people a third of the of by were of the of Stalin's bust in a public in is that it the of the city council that to with the of the monument to the victims of repressions. For the first time in to the monument to they have the monument to the The “Russian Spirit” a and civil society of the Soviet It is not the in groups as the and Soviet was a or a for the of and to associational the “Russian Spirit,” were based on of from p. These are the of the activities of the “Russian The of a for a a for is in the in of Stalin's monument by the “Russian of Stalin on Stalin has of a new a of development of and a publicly available and development for from people as to in the of the “Russian Spirit,” The “Russian Spirit” to as the of the group is and They often to Stalin's for the a and of after of the group at the with They are social in of and and The bust of Stalin the of the The “Russian are not the of the and Stalin the in the p. For the “Russian Spirit,” Stalin is associated with the but they also that was for argues that Stalin the essential of the Russian of the and that of the The of as a is in the of the a p. The as a at a a and does not can is and Stalin to of argues that a more accurate of the of Stalin by the Russian is not that of or but rather or a of The of Stalin is is at to the in The in that the over and in the are to that the Stalinist will not have any as the is not to It is to a of how accurate the of the use of the after the of and that the of Stalin will be time there will be a to the in the of the argue that approach to the past it or p. the is exist in Russia. In it is a of memory because of the absence of any We the with of of the one and the day the to the of Soviet that should and only The is in leaving for the victims in the state The of the in after the of it was a of The of monuments to Stalin is located in the In Russian erected a monument to with the of the of the Russian and the of to the We a actions of the Spirit” to that of the because actions of the state do not a of or positive of the can of what would be positive initiatives to the but the initiatives of the state in the to victims or to the of of is an located in of in the form of a The is to the to form the Stalinist The of does not work it to as be seen from the to the of the Soviet in of by the which not “the place of The nature and the scope of more than argues that what is of the of the victims and and the of the was by as the was of on a and the The “Russian Spirit” is a of the to the Soviet past The of is because focus only on of civil society more civil society to the qualities civil society The civil and “uncivil” society is to as exist. the of a group as “uncivil” is that civil society is inherently actions should be on a by Kopecky and Mudde (2003) the organization through different of time can be to as a “good” civil society and then a few We civil society. the characteristics of civil society, one needs to at or as do not always to Although are not with of The monument is and to or with one monument is a and and and are key of memory argues that they represent the as to as and are to public The “Russian Spirit” and one to question a and based on and (Krygier, p. argues that for civil society to have it should form an Civil society, to be a or based on Another a as is because one civil society the Soviet with For the Soviet as primary in the of is The increasingly the notion of as they not in the Soviet legal for means and but It can the not of civil society, but of any society at (Krygier, p. in The also and “uncivil” society. is of society do not implies with respect and with is in the people Civil is a particular type of it is not a society one on than or Although what one to be to and might not be for the of it provides some The of and is of human rights. provides for the for one group of people a to but can be to Another to the notion of is to the legal or The to the of the the of of broadly or one defines be the of in the context of and and to the is not linked to might the The and the of civil are also of civil society, the for is to The erection of a the of was not an of civil as the group not to the or to question the by a of the “Russian Spirit,” it is a in first to do and then for to do is one should the concept of of “uncivil” civil society is The of the monument to Stalin would not to a the action was The in the group “Russian Spirit,” is to groups exist, but they their on Another in the would as as they are not should argues that groups are not they represent of they toleration” their from the of society, which would their views inherently would not be an as groups in represent and views of the of society. by and post-Soviet and are not the of their views are not based on the and plurality, is it to their to of and the fact that groups do not respect the of their to the can the of groups by a of their p. The “Russian Spirit” the not because they the but because they that “the the The not only to but also to with the be by and policies of the and the context the group for toleration would be the danger that a state will use the “uncivil” to groups and can have a effect on public in countries the public is and the public is Another restrictions is that one or through groups their views through Keeping the on an or the groups from The is that the “uncivil” civil society for to The of civil society that the monument and local municipalities was as it the of and The of red paint on the monument and “henchman” is a of the The of the monument and the of municipalities is a through formal means. actions that the society the the “Russian Spirit” restrictions by the city council through their social and The approach to civil society was they and the of to as the of might be than a the not the idea of but due to their ability to and the of and of different argues that on the action to civil society groups from is the with the developed as was the with the that the of will in the of the argues that now the and are this as legal is not as as a the The organizations to the “Russian Spirit” are a as a means of They of a as the of and based on and as or of the of the state monuments in of perpetrators is the on the of the monument to a people & The monument was erected on and was the the & The of that of to the to The was based on the of in of the of This an by the which that it is to in or of or for of to or & p. For a society to the formal is from the due to the absence of on the would have a more effect on society, rather than a of local can the groups is by on the political and in a political through rather than not to and the ideas and views that should particular not to that which to the but rather the which can be by the of the We should for the to the a of of history and the of violence, in to the through of an was The revisionism, it the of violence, be through means. It of in public to a but on the of and in some of implies the a of the of to a erection of the to on from from and and the of a for power For notion of and as a form of is in p. concept of of the implies the power and new to forms of p. The power is based on “the of and the of p. For to new forms of should the rather than the p. The monument to Stalin a particular which not only but what Stalin The of resistance, the of paint on the the of the call to the a of the by p. The of the would be the attempts to to of state in a society. The state in a society of needs a of for and to the of Following this the groups the society in as they prospects for and to of from political and and the of the which p. for to and one needs in to the 2002). one always needs to We not only to the actions of the “Russian Spirit,” but of civil society, which poured the red paint on the monument to the of civil society is to the of as In this the are of this does not the civil society, the red paint violence, the monument also The actions of the “Russian Spirit” are of the civil form of the is not but the what the monument is inherently It is to The civil society the role of a An of that the of for and and is not in the public space. The of red paint is not an of it is an at a more accurate by the of the monument through It is essential to what Stalin to the “Russian Spirit,” as they might not as a The “Russian Spirit” argues that Stalin a and is more to this group, is that Stalin the in and at any the is the of of and They of the for or of was and can for in the with a message that the and of The “Russian Spirit” does not Stalin's but rather that the was the They the that this is the only to society. The of the their of a of of of of & p. They the of Stalin's politics in as the only to the of which they do not by and has an It is not a but a that the of The more a the more power The “Russian Spirit” the power of The of is not a is a a of how one a with respect to of the They the of by that Stalin to the The absence of the Stalinist in their and and they for in or and a to that by the subject to be and in it is as it the of violence, it that the is the of groups the “Russian Spirit” by the with a of It is more than The monument to Stalin is a of as it the victims of that their is than the to a In The in and their and is and that it a form of which a society can and should in p. argues that not the memory is but the This to the of it the and the In a be of is The of is to the and be The of the monument to Stalin in a Siberian a of concerning characteristics and of civil society. role with respect to the memory of the the of and revisionism, one to the to the and the notion of of the one needs for civil society, which and not to but the what one should the different from to be Should the monument of a to as not to use the the Kopecky and (2003) that it is to put on civil society has not only because one needs the for the “good” to but also because of the and nature of civil society. It is to civil society on a particular at a in the monument to the “Russian Spirit,” the due to the absence of formal it in with the of the state concerning the Soviet the The the monument to of and but lacked and violence, the characteristics that a of and to one understanding of what The concept of and and be through the possibilities that civil society provides the possibilities a of the as it to the the monument It to and the history of from which p. implies the of a different form of violence, based on the of the of the society is more than the a and a The of “uncivil” initiatives from civil society more to In this it the of the politics of public memory in the than and the one should more on how to with what of by and for the legacies of the past This paper was the at the for I to the for the the and for their and of the I have also from the of the paper and the and Eastern Europe and to for on the of the I to for more to for violence, and to for to that the to for I to the and for their are is a at the at is on the role civil society in with respect to the Soviet in after the of the Soviet an in and from the of