In order to encourage friends, families, and neighbors to turn on one another, Stalin’s show trials revealed that anyone could be a traitor to the Communist party with propaganda reinforcing what the show trials explicitly stated: watch out for spies, saboteurs, and enemies of Communism, for they could be anyone and anywhere (see visual propaganda, 9). But, as demonstrated in Slansky’s trial, it was instructed that Russians should especially ‘watch out’ for Jewish people, being that “as a child of the petit bourgeoisie (and, it was understood, as a Jew), he could never truly be part of the workers’ movement” (Feinberg, 6). What appears to be at the root of Slansky (apologies for the lack of accents on the name) was Stalin’s antisemitism.
As much as the Soviet State changed following the Russian Revolution, it appears that at least this element of antisemitism stayed and continued to be perpetrated, at least under Stalin. And apparently, this anti-Semitic undertone continued to run throughout show trials throughout the Soviet Union. However, linking the Slansky trial and other Jewish citizens of the Soviet Union to Zionism and the new state of Israel is ironic, to say the least, given that the Soviet Union was the first state to recognize Israel. How could Israel and Zionism both comply with Stalin’s communist ideology while also violate it at the same time? Wasn’t the Soviet Union supposed to be a place free of racism and xenophobia in the face of the U.S. which still remained in the Jim Crow Era? It appears this is just one moment of Stalin’s hypocrisy. On one hand, recognizing Israel as a state would remove their once Big Three ally and geopolitical rival, Great Britain, from influence in Israel. Thus, this fits with the Soviet ideology because it resulted in the removal of an imperial power, giving both Stalin and Israel a shared goal. Further, Stalin may have hoped that Israel would prove to be a Soviet ally as the U.S. seemingly was replacing Britain in influence in the Middle East.
For clarity, Stalin did not support Zionism and condemn it (to the point of marking it as traitorous) simultaneously. Slansky’s trial occurred in 1952, four years after the Soviet Union recognized Israel. Stalin’s support of Israel was short-lived. Israel relied on emigration for the state to exist while Stalin was not open to this possibility. As Soviet propaganda dictates, the Soviet Union was a happy place for everyone – including Soviet Jews – and thus, no one was leaving. Thus, Israel soon turned to the U.S. as an ally which ultimately resulted in the Soviet Union supporting the Arabs in their conflict while also raising the antisemitism that long thrived in the Russian Empire to new heights in the form of publicly displaying it in show trials. Though this was only a small portion of the reading, I thought it was worth looking into deeper. Do you think Stalin and the Soviet Union’s display of antisemitism was simply residual of the Russian Empire? Or, did the antisemitism potentially spring out of Israel’s new alignment with the U.S. and the Soviet Union’s loss of Israel as an ally? Both or neither of these? And, was this display of antisemitism hypocritical or violating of communist ideology, (i.e. does it fit just as well as U.S. racism and liberal democracy did together)? Along that same line, did support of Zionism also violate the Soviet Union’s communist ideology? Also, should we really even be conflating antisemitism and anti-Zionism like Stalin and the Soviet Union did?
I think what you bring up is super interesting and important. I think the antisemitism arises probably out of both ideas of being “Russian” and Isreal’s ally in the US. Although the Soviet Union is very specific about its desire to not be an imperialist nation, they fall short. The Soviet Union is made up of so many nationalities, including Jews, and although through propaganda everyone is having fun that does not seem to be the case in reality. I think at the end of the day the Soviet Union has a hierarchy with people who consider themselves “Russian” and people who do not. Any form of racism would seem to violate the ideology of the Soviet Union as they strive to be inclusive and showcase the nationalities that make up the Soviet Union. Yet, by controlling these nationalities they are in turn marginalizing culture and causing distress.
I think you bring up a really good point! It seems like the USSR is contradicting itself, but then again, I feel like changes on things like positions on foreign policy (in this case, Israel) happen as time passes. In this case, I find it absolutely crazy how anti-Semitism can rise so soon after WWII and the USSR recognition of the state of Israel. But, to answer your question, I think the USSR changed its position on Israel due to the US support of the state. Additionally, I feel like for the purpose of spreading communism and oppressing dissent, there needed to be a “face of the enemy.” I feel like it would be easy to just blame a whole group of people and claim that their dissent is due to disloyalty to the country rather than because of the flaws of communism.
This is really well thought out, Amanda! I think a number of factors played into this blatant anti-Semitism, some of which Blake and Veena touch on in their responses to this post as well – especially the contradictions to the Soviet Socialist policies. However, I think a major part of this antisemitic tendencies is the inherent anti-religion within Soviet society itself. The USSR spent years pressing on its anti-religious campaign. They tore down old religious symbols and replaced them with buildings dedicated to collectivism, “encouraged” rug makers in the Kazakhstan region to place Lenin’s face in their weavings, and had a plethora of other policies and movements to separate the Soviet Union from religion as much as possible. I feel that this has a great contribution into the antisemitism that can be seen in this trial.