The Renaissance of the Russian Intelligentsia
JAMES H. BILLINGTON, author of the forthcoming book, "Mikhailovsky and Russian Populism."
IT IS ironic that in the recent events in Poland and Hungary a leading rôle was played by one of the most favored and privileged groups in Communist society, the intellectuals. It was the students who led the Hungarians into combat and provided the most active element wherever else in the Soviet bloc echoes of the Hungarian and Polish experience were heard. It is also ironic that this agitation occurred at a time when many social theorists in the West had all but concluded that Soviet intimidation and indoctrination made uprisings of the 1848 variety impossible in Communist lands. Clearly, some reappraisal is in order of the rôle of the intellectual class in Eastern Europe. For the student of international affairs such an examination should perhaps focus on two questions: What is the nature of the ferment among intellectuals in the U.S.S.R. itself? What is its political significance?
Since at least mid-1953, Soviet writers have been actively seeking greater liberty, attempting through both their writings and their public meetings to limit the authority of their Party supervisors. The Party's difficulties in sustaining controls in the post-Stalin era became evident when it proved unable to define a firm line at the Writers' Congress in December 1954. The situation worsened in the summer of 1956 when a number of heterodox works by formerly purged writers began to appear in literary journals and when Questions of History, the leading historical journal, pressed its campaign to reëxamine the Soviet past and "reëvaluate the bourgeois historical legacy" in the face of direct Party criticism. By early 1957, the régime was confronted with direct attacks on the long-sacred doctrine of "socialist realism" both in the review Questions of Philosophy and at the Ukrainian Writers' Congress.
Even more alarming than these manifestations of discontent was the fact that the older generation of disaffected intellectuals had apparently been joined by a large segment of the student population, which was both more important to the régime and more outspoken in criticizing it. Students appear to have played a leading rôle in the Georgian riots of March 1956; and young students and technologists figured large in Pravda's denunciation in April 1956 of "degenerate" excesses in the campaign of de-Stalinization...
This is a premium article
You must be a logged in Foreign Affairs subscriber to continue reading. If you wish to continue reading this article please subscribe , or activate your online account to get full online access.
Log In
Buy PDF
Buy a premium PDF reprint of this article.Related
IT might be supposed that as a result of so many years of Stalinist conditioning the new Soviet man would be a new creature, as different from his Western counterpart as the Soviet system differs from Western forms of government. But this has not, in fact, turned out to be so. In so far as recent conversations of mine with students, clerks in shops, taxi-drivers and stray acquaintances of all sorts can convey a just impression, the result is a kind of arrested infantile development, not a different kind of maturity.
Editor's Note: This paper, prepared last spring for the Center for International Studies, M.I.T., will appear in "The American Style: Essays on Value and Performance," edited by Elting E. Morrison, to be published in 1958 by Harper and Brothers.
THE individual human personality is fighting a losing battle against heavy odds in Russia today. When one hears of state planning in the Soviet Union one usually thinks of factories, steel plants, large grain farms and cotton plantations, tractors and other accessories of industrialization.

Sign-up for free weekly updates from ForeignAffairs.com.