Here is a pioneeering account of everyday life under Stalin, written by one of our foremost authorities on modern Russain history. Focusing on urban areas in the 1930's, Sheila Fitzpatrick shows that with the adoption of collectivisation and the first Five Year Plan, everyday life was utterly transformed. with the abolition of the market, shortages of food, clothing, and all kinds of consumer goods became endemic. As peasants fled the collectivised villages, major cities were soon in the grip of a major housing crisis, with families jammed for decades into tiny single rooms in communal appartments, counting living space in square metres. It was a world of overcrowding, privation, endless queues, and broken families, in which the regime's promise of future socialist abundance rand hollowly. We read of a government bureaucracy that often turned everyday life into a nightmare, and of the ways that ordinary citizens tried to circumvent it, primarily by patronage and the ubiquitous system of personal connections known as "blat". And we read of the police surveillance that was endemic to this society, and the waves of terror like the Great Purges of 1937, that periodically cast this world into turmoil. Fitzpatrick illuminates the ways that Soviet city-dwellers coped with this world, examining such diverse activities as shoppping, travelling, telling jokes, finding an apartment, getting an education, cultivating patrons and connections, marrying and raising a family, writing complaints and denunciations, voting, and trying to steer clear of the secret police. Based on extensive research in the Soviet archives only recently opened to historians, this superb book illuminates the ways ordinary people tried to live normal lives under extraordinary circumstances.

《大师和玛格丽特》究竟是怎样一部书？它是一本“对二三十年代苏联社会现实进行恶意嘲讽”、“主张向恶势力投降并为它服务”的怪诞小说呢？抑或是“启迪人们内心的善，净化人的心灵”、“帮助人们牢牢把握住自己内心的道德准绳”、歌颂“人对真善美的大胆追求的”“当代苏联文学中的一部主要杰作”呢？众说纷纭。本书作者布尔加科夫又究竟是一个“不理解无产阶级十月革命”、“暴露了本身的人道主义弱点”的平庸作家呢？还是一位思想深邃、“以大无畏精神向一切恶提出挑战”、“集讽刺作家、幻想题材作家、现实主义作家的天才于一身”的文学大师呢？他为何曾把花费两年心血写到第十五章的这部作品的原稿付之一炬，后来又重新握笔，前后历时十二载，八易其稿呢？他在自知身患绝症、不久人世的情况下，在生活困苦、精神压力沉重、明知这部作品不可能发表的处境中，是什么力量支持他坚持修改并补充它，直至生命之烛燃尽呢？现在看来，至少可以说：盖棺时某些人论定他为“反政治的小说家和不严肃的幽默家”，把他的作品说成是“存心取悦于读者”、“恶意讽刺现实”等，这些结论是下得过于仓促了。为布尔加科夫恢复名誉成为苏联文艺界一桩重要事件，他的作品在八十年代仍如此畅销，这里必定有其内在原因。我们应该努力通过作者的思想、生活及创作道路探索他的创作意图，在作品本身中寻找其艺术魅力的源泉及上述问题的答案。

More than seventy years after the birth of the Soviet Union, the events that brought the Bolsheviks to power are still poorly understood. Ever since the first reports of the revolution reached Western audiences, analysts have blamed or credited Lenin and his party for overthrowing the old order singlehandedly. Yet studies of the revolution in recent years have revealed the depth of the crisis through which Tsarist society passed late in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. The essays in this book address the process of worker alienation and the way that the Bolsheviks appealed to, rather than exploited, the working population, especially in the capital cities of Petrograd and Moscow.

Since its creation immediately after the Russian revolution,the militia has had a broad range of social,political and economic functions necessary to direct and control a highly centralized socialist state.However,as the communst party lost its legitimacy the militia was increasingly thrust into the front line of political conflict.A task it was unsuited to perform.Despite the efforts of perestroika to reform it,the collapse of the Soviet state also led to the collapse of morale within the militia. Louise Shelley provides a comprehensive view of the history,development,functions,personnel and operations of the militia from its inception until after the demise of the Soviet state.The militia combined elements of continental,socialist and colonial policing.Its functions and operations changed with the development of the state,yet it always intervened significantly in citizen's lives and citizens were very much involved in their own control.Over time the militia became more removed from politics and more concerned with crime control,but it always remained a tool of the party. This is the first book to analyze the militia,which was one of the most vital elements of control within the Soviet State.It will be a crucial aid to understanding the authoritarianism of the communist system and its legacy for Russia and the successor states. Louise I.Shelley is Professor at the Department of Justice,Law and Society and the School of International Service at the American University,Washington D.C.

The great romance and fear of bloody revolution - strange blend of idealism and terror - have been superseded by blind faith in the bloodless expansion of human rights and global capitalism. Flying in the face of history, violence is dismissed as rare, immoral, and counterproductive. Arguing against this pervasive wishful thinking, the distinguished historian Arno J. Mayer revisits the two most tumultuous and influential revolutions of modern times: the French Revolution of 1789 and the Russian Revolution of 1917. Although these two upheavals arose in different environments, they followed similar courses.The thought and language of Enlightenment France were the glories of western civilization; those of tsarist Russia's intelligentsia were on its margins. Both revolutions began as revolts vowed to fight unreason, injustice, and inequality; both swept away old regimes and defied established religions in societies that were 85 percent peasant and illiterate; both entailed the terrifying return of repressed vengeance. Contrary to prevalent belief, Mayer argues, ideologies and personalities did not control events. Rather, the tide of violence overwhelmed the political actors who assumed power and were rudderless. Even the best plans could not stem the chaos that at once benefited and swallowed them. Mayer argues that we have ignored an essential part of all revolutions: the resistances to revolution, both domestic and foreign, which help fuel the spiral of terror.In his sweeping yet close comparison of the world's two transnational revolutions, Mayer follows their unfolding - from the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Bolshevik Declaration of the Rights of the Toiling and Exploited Masses; the escalation of the initial violence into the reign of terror of 1793-95 and of 1918-21; the dismemberment of the hegemonic churches and religion of both societies; the "externalization" of the terror through the Napoleonic wars; and its "internalization" in Soviet Russia in the form of Stalin's "Terror in One Country." Making critical use of theory, old and new, Mayer breaks through unexamined assumptions and prevailing debates about the attributes of these particular revolutions to raise broader and more disturbing questions about the nature of revolutionary violence attending new foundations.