Talk:Soviet democracy

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Poor sourcing[edit]

Anything sourced to www.marxists.org or similar websites should be removed from this article. My very best wishes (talk) 15:48, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment (courtesy @Davide King, Czar, and My very best wishes:): This article is in horrible shape from top to bottom, sourcing, bias, OR, conflation, and lack of focus. WP:TNT is an option, but probably needs an RfC to clarify consensus. Some are trying to turn this into an academic article lay readers will not understand, others are trying to turn it into a propaganda piece lay readers will be mislead by. One thing is certain, readers are not going come here expecting theory or philosophy, they are going to come here looking for an article about an aspect of government in the Soviet Union. There are two articles here that are fighting with each other, one Democracy in the Soviet Union, the other Democracy in Council Communism   // Timothy :: talk  21:45, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal[edit]

  1. Create two new articles: Democracy in the Soviet Union and Democracy in Council Communism (or whatever names seem best).
  2. Turn this article title into a DAB that briefly differentiates each.

For sources I propose that the participants in the split/rewrite agree that:

  • Primary sources are not used, except sparingly in quotes to support secodary sources. When primary sources are used, those with academic English language sources are preferred when possible, otherwise the original language version should be used. This will help with OR/SYNTH.
  • Secondary sources should be from mainstream peer reviewed academic journals and books published by academic presses, preferably post World War II unless an earlier source is more beneficial, and independent of the subject. This will help with IS RS.
  • Create an article Bibliography of Communism containing English language books and journal articles where the criteria for inclusion is specifically that the items are post World War II mainstream IS RS based on the above. I think this will be a valuable resource for editors in other articles. It can include a selection of important primary sources. I already have been working on this off wiki already.
Obviously the above would be simply a gentleperson's agreement and could be waived in special circumstances based on consensus.
  • The goal would be two feature articles and one featured list.
  • A moderator to resolve disputes would be helpful and keep everyone at their best, I think Robert McClenon would be a good choice.
There are plenty of reasons why this may not work, but there are a lot of reasons why it could. I'm completely open to suggestions on alternatives.

  // Timothy :: talk  21:45, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that the page is actually misleading and do not object to any significant reworking, even such splitting with renaming. I also agree that readers are going to come here looking for an article about an aspect of government in the Soviet Union. Speaking of which, as Robert Conquest said, this government represented "a set of phantom institutions and arrangements which put a human face on the hideous realities: a model constitution adopted in a worst period of terror and guaranteeing human rights, elections in which there was only one candidate, and in which 99 percent voted; a parliament at which no hand was ever raised in opposition or abstention."[1] This is probably one of the most precise summaries I have seen. My very best wishes (talk) 02:12, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'm going to oppose this proposal on the grounds that separating the theory of a workers democracy from the history of how that system was implemented makes no sense. There are already way too many overlapping articles about workers' councils and soviets and the ideas surrounding them. The proposed *democracy in council communism* would have to include historical information about the Soviet Union anyway, due to the power that workers' councils had in the Russian revolution. Both articles would have no real scope. Flameoguy (talk) 01:33, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Robert Conquest Reflections on a Ravaged Century (2000) ISBN 0-393-04818-7, page 97
My very best wishes, I understand that you really like Conquest but he is not the be-all and end-all. In addition, the work you mentioned is not really about Soviet democracy but how evil the French Revolution, Khmer Rouge, communism, fascism, Bolshevism and Nazism really are/were. We need academic books and peer-reviewed articles whose main topic is soviet democracy. We need much more than just a quote or a passing mention in a book, whose main topic is not really this one. Davide King (talk) 02:30, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oh no, this is an academic book by probably the most famous historian of the Soviet Union. Are you saying you disagree with his summary? My very best wishes (talk) 02:38, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Here is another book. It tells the same, just uses more simple language. It tells the first genuine democratization (not even a democracy) in the USSR had happen under Gorbachev. My very best wishes (talk) 03:05, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
That one would also be great, but the content is mostly inaccessible. My very best wishes (talk) 03:07, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I do not disagree but we need books and peer-reviewed journals whose main topic is soviet democracy. What is the expertness of Bullock and Coleman? I get results from a Dr. Bullock and from the football player Coleman. The first one would be better served at Soviet Empire since that is the main topic while the other can be used here. Google Scholar can help us find books specifically about Soviet democracy. Apparently, Arendt advocated council democracy (see "Hannah Arendt's Argument for Council Democracy" and "Hannah Arendt's Argument for Council Democracy" in Hannah Arendt: Critical Essays), so we must clearly distinguish between the two. Davide King (talk) 04:07, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
TimothyBlue, these are very good proposal and very fair solutions, thank you. Other possible names could be Council democracy (the theory) and Soviet democracy (as practised in the Soviet Union), which the current article seems to conflate or treat as the same thing. Other solutions could be Soviet democracy (the theory) and Soviet democracy (form of government) or Soviet democracy (political system) (as practised in the Soviet Union), or even Democracy in the Soviet Union, where we discuss the form of goverment/political system and its democratic lack thereof. Davide King (talk) 02:23, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I am going to publish a Bibliography of Communism article with a limited number of entries and we can propose additions on the talk page, as well as discuss the lead and format. The more sources we can bring to the table for agreement on, the less fuss about IS RS will happen down the road. Since the Bibliography will be built from an open group discussion/consensus, it will be a resource for the community and especially AN/RS. Some authors we may just be able to add in as a whole, such as Conquest and Fitzpatrick, same with some journals. I think we all agree Oxford journals would be an IS RS.
  • I think Davide King should facilitate the rewriting of an article on Democracy in Council Communism or (some form of this name). Personally I would avoid the word Soviet in the title (it can be explained and included in the article) for clarity per WP:NAMINGCRITERIA, but I will defer to you and others.
  • I think My very best wishes should facilitate the rewriting of an article on Democracy in the Soviet Union (or some form of that name, but making it clear that it is about the Soviet Union per WP:NAMINGCRITERIA). Democracy during the Russian Revolution would be a good companion.
I think Demokratizatsiya (Soviet Union) /should be /will be an important part of Democracy in the Soviet Union and will become redundant and should be redirected at the right time. I don't think any of the content is worth saving, it too OR/SYNTH, reads like a baseball game pregame and play by play, and isunsourced, the Democracy in the Soviet Union will be much better.
  • I think People's democracy (Marxism–Leninism) can wait but should eventually be deleted. The AT is very disputable. On a historical level, it combines too much, obsures important individual detail. On a theory level it is just a partially written mess. I think we should have an articles for each nation and about the theory, maybe People's democracy (communism) and Government of the Polish People's Republic (etc). Our experience with this article and the Bibliography we develop will help with this.
Thanks again for the positive feedback, please give more. I don't want to seem like I'm controling the conversation, just want to facilitate it, so stop/slow/redirect me as you wish. I look forward to your replies. I geninuely hope we get 3 FA/L articles, maybe more.   // Timothy :: talk  04:29, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I would be happy to write Democracy during the Russian Revolution Article, as this is an area I've read a lot on, although that ought to go up to the first soviet union, and essentially will end where Democracy in the Soviet Union picks up, suggesting that they should really be two halves of the same article under two major headings, either way I the earlier area is one I've studied in quiet some depth. Z.Dearg (talk) 19:19, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sources[edit]

Sources for "soviet democracy" from Google Scholar include:

Sources for "council democracy" from Google Scholar include:

Davide King (talk) 05:13, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think, ideally, this article should focus on Russia and the USSR, briefly discussing the creation of soviets in 1905 and 1917 and how the Bolsheviks called for "all power to the soviets." Then a discussion of the Bolshevik/CSPU conception of soviet democracy and how the system was modified over time, notably by the 1936 Constitution. As for how system worked in practice, there's already an article titled Politics of the Soviet Union. As for "council communism," that is an essentially separate subject which ought to have its own article. I don't think having a separate article titled "democracy in the Soviet Union" is a good idea, firstly because many would argue there was no democracy in the USSR, and secondly because this article on the concept of "Soviet democracy" can easily encompass such discussion. --Ismail (talk) 08:54, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ismail, I agree. As shown from these sources above, the common name for the first proposal, as outlined by you, is soviet democracy; and for the second one is council democracy, which is indeed a separate subjects. I do not see how Democracy in Council Communism is a good name, including wrong capitalisation. The topic is not council communism but council democracy, which is a different thing and has been advocated by people such as Arendt who are not communists. I agree with your thoughts about "democracy in the Soviet Union" and "Soviet democracy" would be a better choice, for "council democracy" and "soviet democracy" are the common names for these two different and separate subjects. Davide King (talk) 19:24, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Looks good. Most important, the Soviet meaning of "democracy" was completely different from that in the Western civilization. That must be explained starting from the lead, and at least some the sources do just that, for example article The Soviet concept of democracy. Basically, in the Soviet language and theory, democracy is not government by the people (Western concept), but government for the people by the CPSU [but wait a minute, is not it autocracy?] and so on (see page 515). Hence, as the article concludes (page 518), "in the Soviet Union... the real thing, true democracy does not and cannot exist". More generally, according to the Soviet legal theory, it is the government who is the beneficiary of human rights which are to be asserted against the individual, whereas Western law claimed the opposite.[1] My very best wishes (talk) 20:02, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Lambelet, Doriane. "The Contradiction Between Soviet and American Human Rights Doctrine: Reconciliation Through Perestroika and Pragmatism." 7 Boston University International Law Journal. 1989. pp. 61–62.
  • I noticed this discussion is about a month old and most of you seem to be in agreement to split the article. I would like to point out that the articles Soviet (council) and Soviet Republic may also be of use for this discussion. Sorry in advance if I am intruding, but I was wondering if You/We/I could start splitting this article? Many thanks, and best wishes to all of you ValerySablin (talk) 04:09, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • This article's scope should be left alone. The reason is that this article is linked to within the text of a number of other articles in contexts that are about the concept of council democracy, (which soviet democracy is synonymous with - soviet is the Russian word for council), and have nothing to do with the Soviet Union per se. So, any article about democracy in the Soviet Union itself ought just to be a new article (called whatever you like - Democracy in the USSR, USSR Democracy, Democracy in the Soviet Union, Soviet Union democracy, etc - but not Soviet democracy. A point of note, "soviet democracy" only existed in Russia for less thana year, from late 1917-1918. Lenin effectively put an end to it when he returned from exile. The goal was for it to eventually be restored, I think - allegedly, anyway - according to the Trotskyists this should have been done, but Stalin sabotaged that plan and created a bureaucracy instead. Firejuggler86 (talk) 01:24, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Definition[edit]

Under the definition topic, there is no definition given, unlike in the introduction. It deals with the political system of the post-WWII USSR, which wasn't a Soviet democracy according to the introduction, since it didn't know a recall system, nor an imperative mandate, nor the basic organisation of voters. With the 1936 constitution, any remaining elements (de facto already abolished via the monopoly of power of the party and the GPU) got abolished, and replaced by a caricature of Western parliaments (to paraphrase Trotsky). The content of the chapter also seems biased and uncritical, since just not getting shot for expressing criticism is not per se democracy, the party leaders in many Eastern bloc countries loved to see themselves as the good leaders who care about their people. That's however not a Soviet democracy as outlined in the article, but what 19th century monarchs did. Socius sociologicus (talk) 11:30, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. I think this article could benefit from having more information about more authentic examples such as Makhnovshchina. Charles Essie (talk) 21:00, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unclear terms[edit]

Definition section lacks clarity as to when it is referring to the general concept of soviet democracy vs. when it is referring to the specific implementation of that concept within the former USSR. 24.25.214.58 (talk) 19:30, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think this article should discuss both in detail as well as other cases such as the Hungarian Soviet Republic and the Makhnovshchina. Charles Essie (talk) 21:40, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Soviet_democracy&oldid=1207404677"