<p>The dissertation is a study of the 1985 alcohol policy reform in the Soviet Union. The task is to explain the making and failure of the policy, and to examine the policy as a case in rule creation in society. More specifically, I analyze the policy-making in terms of symbolic politics, moral entrepreneurship, and the prohibitive measures it led to a5 a reaction to alcohol abuse. Each of these concepts offers a partial explanation of rule creation. Yet, none adequately explains the policy repeal, much less the creation of informal social definitions of right and wrong. Similar to alcohol prohibitions in the USA, Finland and Canada, the Soviet alcohol reform effort attempted but ultimately did not succeed in changing the social definition of alcohol and drinking. This is in contrast to cannabis, opium and cocaine prohibitions that aimed to preserve existing definitions and have been largely successful around the world. The relationship between formal and informal definitions is addressed as a key element in any understanding of variations in the fate ofmoral reforms. From this standpoint, the post-reform period comes to be viewed as a distinct stage wherein the viability of a proposed definition is tested. Presently dominant approaches to the definitional process appear to limit their own potential in that they refuse to reconsider assumptions that can be shown erroneous, do not differentiate between dissimilar processes and settings, do not ask more pointed research questions and do not stimulate empirically grounded and verifiable explanations. To redress these limitations, I offer a critical reexamination of both the moral entrepreneur and claims-making approaches to social definition-making.</p> / Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)

The Polish Independence Day march in Warsaw in November 2017 drew a flurry of international media attention for its shocking mass display of far-right nationalism, connections to neo-Nazi groups, and feature of openly racist, Islamophobic, anti-Semitic, and homophobic slogans. However, the dangerously “othering” nationalist ideologies expressed in Poland during this demonstration are far from unique. Over the past 20-30 years, eerily similar nationalist movements have simultaneously emerged across Eastern Europe and the West. Paradoxically, the nation-state has perhaps never had less agency as increasingly global capitalism continues to encroach upon the dominance of the nation itself. I argue that this trend of new nationalist movements indicates a departure from the traditional definitions of nationalism that requires a distinct category, which I refer to as neo-nationalism. In Chapter 1, I differentiate neo-nationalism from conventional understandings of nationalist politics and provide a working definition of neo- nationalism in the twenty-first century. I aim to show that a contextualization of these neo- nationalist movements alongside increasingly global capitalism is essential to understanding the othering natures of neo-nationalist ideologies and their paradoxical nature – both national and transnational, both shocking and entirely banal. I illustrate this by returning to the case of modern Poland, employing a visual rhetorical analysis from a Marxist-feminist perspective in order to demonstrate the manifestations of particular and dangerous dynamics of othering in Polish neo- nationalism. I refer to these dynamics as “capital-isms,” such that they are the “shocking” expression of what are in fact pervasive prejudices brought to the surface by the changing conditions of global capitalism. In Chapter 2, I examine the rhetoric surrounding the Polish Independence Day march in 2017 to highlight the paradoxes and power mechanisms at play in Polish neo-nationalism. I follow with an exploration of the rhetoric employed by the Polish far- right nationalist party, Law and Justice, with particular contextualization with regard to its relationship with the European Union in Chapter 3. Finally, I conclude this thesis by considering the implications of this research for the study of neo-nationalism going forward. / M.A. / The Polish Independence Day march in Warsaw in November 2017 drew a flurry of international media attention for its shocking mass display of far-right nationalism, connections to neo-Nazi groups, and feature of openly racist, Islamophobic, anti-Semitic, and homophobic slogans. However, the dangerously “othering” nationalist ideologies expressed in Poland during this demonstration are far from unique. Over the past 20-30 years, eerily similar nationalist movements have simultaneously emerged across Eastern Europe and the West. In this thesis, I theorize the Polish far-right nationalism on display at the Independence Day march as part of a broader trend of neo-nationalist movements, which I demonstrate are paradoxical in nature. After establishing the defining characteristics of neo-nationalism as a phenomenon, I highlight these paradoxes through an analysis of Polish neo-nationalist rhetoric. Furthermore, by placing this rhetoric within its socioeconomic and historical contexts, I demonstrate that the “shocking” display of far-right nationalism in the march is an expression of what are in fact pervasive prejudices brought to the surface by the changing conditions of global capitalism.

In examining the military atmosphere of the Soviet Army the author will attempt to get the feeling of the life of the junior officers and enlisted men. The topics covered will include training, army regulations, military law, Party influence and control within the army, career potential, pay, retirement, daily routine, promotions, induction, terms of service, medical facilities, Post Exchanges, and professional schooling available to officers and men, only to list a few. No work will be done on tactics, techniques, or weapons of the Soviet Army.

The thesis compares particular privatization methods in the USSR/the Russian Federation and the Czech and Slovak Federative Republic/the Czech Republic. It compares "small privatization", "big privatization" and mass privatization methods.

O presente trabalho se propõe a refletir acerca da trajetória do pensamento político e econômico de Mikhail Gorbachev durante os anos em que esteve à frente do Partido Comunista da URSS e conduziu as reformas iniciadas em 1985. Não se trata, portando, de um estudo minucioso da perestroika, nem de um trabalho biográfico sobre o último líder máximo soviético. Nosso enfoque se volta para as rupturas e continuidades no entendimento do secretário-geral quanto às políticas adotadas e à própria natureza do regime. O exame crítico pormenorizado das diversas intervenções e publicações de Gorbachev nos permite demonstrar como transitam na sua visão conceitos chaves como a introdução de elementos de mercado na economia, a burocracia partidária e a democratização da sociedade e do sistema político da URSS. Torna-se possível ainda compreender o caminho percorrido na visão do líder quanto à própria ideia de socialismo, que caminha da filiação aos pilares ideológicos oficiais para uma vertente cada vez mais próxima da socialdemocracia, bem como a natureza do regime que conduzia, que ao final seria caracterizado por ele como totalitário. / This paper aims to reflect on the path of political and economic thought of Mikhail Gorbachev during the years he was ahead of the USSR Communist Party and led the reforms initiated in 1985. It is not, in this sense, a detailed study of perestroika or a biographical work on the last Soviet leader. Our focus turns to the ruptures and continuities in understanding the Secretary-General as to the adopted policies and the very nature of the regime. The detailed critical examination of the various interventions and Gorbachev publications allows us to demonstrate how key concepts transiting in his vision as the introduction of market elements in the economy, the party bureaucracy and the democratization of society and the political system of the USSR. It is also possible to understand the path taken in the leader\'s vision about the very idea of socialism, which walks of membership in the official ideological pillars to a shed ever closer to social democracy, and the nature of the regime he led, that in the end he characterized as totalitarian.

La Lettonie est l’un des derniers pays indépendants à avoir été rattachés à l’Union soviétique. Elle n’est annexée qu’en 1940 – en conséquence de la définition des « sphères d’intérêts » soviétiques issue du Pacte Ribbentrop-Molotov, tout autant que de la menaçante puissante allemande en Europe. Elle connaît une soviétisation originale, contrastée, violente, profondément liée aux circonstances de la Seconde Guerre mondiale. L’invasion, puis l’occupation allemande interviennent un an à peine après l’annexion. La vision d’une collaboration de masse, les potentiels de résistance décuplés par le conflit, l’ampleur de la Shoah aussi sont autant de facteurs bouleversant considérablement le processus d’uniformisation avec le reste de l’URSS. En 1944, l’Armée rouge reconquiert une république qui lui est profondément hostile. Parallèlement, durant la guerre, l’URSS a formé les futurs cadres de la république restaurée.De 1939 à 1949, le processus d’homogénéisation se dissout dans une éternelle guerre et sortie de guerre, marquée notamment par la guérilla antisoviétique, et les mesures d’abord tâtonnantes, puis radicales prises par le régime stalinien. Ma thèse suit un cadre chronologique, afin de cerner les ruptures et les tragédies qui marquent l’espace et ses populations. Mais certaines continuités se dégagent, malgré les immenses fractures temporelles, rapides et incessantes de cette époque. A travers la mobilité institutionnelle et humaine, en croisant histoire politique et histoire sociale, étude de l’administration, de la répression et des mouvements de population, se dégage la singularité d’une république « occidentale » de l’Union. / Latvia was one of the last independent countries to be forcibly become a “Soviet Republic”. It was annexed only in 1940, as a consequence of the secret protocols of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, as well as the growing German threat in Europe. The sovietization that occurred afterwards was uncommon and violent. The German invasion and occupation of Latvia occurred a year after the annexation. During the war, the Soviet leaders elaborated an image of a “rebel” territory (because of the collaboration with the German occupiers, the Holocaust, and the growing anti-Soviet resistance movement). In 1944, the Red Army recovered an hostile and quite illegitimate republic. As the same time, most of the future leaders of the Soviet Latvian republic had been formed in non-occupied Russia.From 1939 to 1949, the homogenization process came along with a never-ending war and “aftermath of war”. This period was particularly characterized by the anti-Soviet guerilla, and by the changing Soviet politics towards “a new territory” (from hesitation to radicalization). The PhD dissertation follows the chronological frames of those changes, in order to insist on the huge breaks and tragedies that reached the territory and its people. Thanks to the analysis of the institutional and human motilities, thanks to the methods of both political and social history, I focus on three main dimensions: the constant turn-over in the “cadres” of the Republic, the specificities of the Stalinist repression, and the population displacements. Those aspects draw the peculiarities of the “Soviet Western borderland”.

This dissertation aims to discuss the incorporation of the &ldquo / nationalist&rdquo / Kazak intellectuals of Alash Orda to the Soviet Socialist Republics and their role in the establishment of the Kazak ASSR. In the course of events they acted first together with Russian liberal democrats, then they sought to establish a national government and fought against the Bolsheviks, but after 1920 they chose to stay in the USSR and join the modernization process of their homeland alongside the Bolsheviks. In the mainstream academic discourse the local leaders in the republics of the USSR are generally considered as passive victims of the Soviet policies. The members of the Kazak national movement of Alash Orda are also neglected as weak political figures after they had accepted the Soviet rule. But they continued their struggle for enlightening the Kazak people in 1920s. Their collaboration with the Bolsheviks was concomitant to their motives of modernizing the Kazaks. Their role in the Soviet Kazakstan did not come to an end after their acceptance of the Soviet sovereignty but it continued. My argument is that the struggle of the members of Alash Orda was in continuity with their program before the revolution, and their cooperation with the Bolsheviks was a way to realize their objectives, and it opened a sphere for them to have a role in the formation of the Kazak ASSR.

O presente trabalho visa analisar a política externa da União das Repúblicas Socialistas Soviéticas (URSS) no período de 1917 a 1985. Até 1953, a política da URSS caracterizou-se como defensiva: buscava, em meio a um período de profunda crise do sistema capitalista, evitar as invasões a seu território, objetivando a modernização acelerada não apenas para integrar o país ao mundo produtivo e industrializado, como para também ter condições materiais de defender-se e de combater os inimigos em caso de guerra. No período posterior a 1953, o status de grande potência e líder do bloco socialista marcou um novo capítulo na história da política externa soviética – isso porque obterá um caráter mais reativo, em decorrência de um novo contexto internacional, que se estruturava na competição intersistêmica do bloco capitalista e socialista, como exposto por Fred Halliday. A URSS atuou no intuito de promover aliados e parcerias, especialmente no Terceiro Mundo. Dessa forma, como um todo, a URSS acabou por também promover uma política de coexistência pacífica contra o imperialismo, impulsionando uma mudança qualitativa nas relações de poder para as relações internacionais. / This study aims to analyze the foreign policy of the USSR in the period from 1917 to 1985. Until 1953, the policy of the USSR was known as defensive, as sought in the midst of a period of profound crisis of the capitalist system, prevent intrusions into its territory, seeking accelerated modernization not only in order to integrate the country into productive and industrialized world, but also to be able to defend material conditions and fight enemies in case of war. After 1953, the status of great power and leader of the socialist bloc marked a new chapter in the history of soviet foreign policy, giving a more reactive perspective to its actions as a result of a new international environment: the intersystem competition among the capitalist bloc and the socialist bloc, as exposed by Fred Halliday. Thus, the USSR acts in order to promote partnerships and allies, especially in the Third World. Thus, as a whole, the USSR also ends up promoting a policy of peaceful coexistence, against imperialism, driving a qualitative shift in power relations to international relations.

O presente trabalho visa analisar a política externa da União das Repúblicas Socialistas Soviéticas (URSS) no período de 1917 a 1985. Até 1953, a política da URSS caracterizou-se como defensiva: buscava, em meio a um período de profunda crise do sistema capitalista, evitar as invasões a seu território, objetivando a modernização acelerada não apenas para integrar o país ao mundo produtivo e industrializado, como para também ter condições materiais de defender-se e de combater os inimigos em caso de guerra. No período posterior a 1953, o status de grande potência e líder do bloco socialista marcou um novo capítulo na história da política externa soviética – isso porque obterá um caráter mais reativo, em decorrência de um novo contexto internacional, que se estruturava na competição intersistêmica do bloco capitalista e socialista, como exposto por Fred Halliday. A URSS atuou no intuito de promover aliados e parcerias, especialmente no Terceiro Mundo. Dessa forma, como um todo, a URSS acabou por também promover uma política de coexistência pacífica contra o imperialismo, impulsionando uma mudança qualitativa nas relações de poder para as relações internacionais. / This study aims to analyze the foreign policy of the USSR in the period from 1917 to 1985. Until 1953, the policy of the USSR was known as defensive, as sought in the midst of a period of profound crisis of the capitalist system, prevent intrusions into its territory, seeking accelerated modernization not only in order to integrate the country into productive and industrialized world, but also to be able to defend material conditions and fight enemies in case of war. After 1953, the status of great power and leader of the socialist bloc marked a new chapter in the history of soviet foreign policy, giving a more reactive perspective to its actions as a result of a new international environment: the intersystem competition among the capitalist bloc and the socialist bloc, as exposed by Fred Halliday. Thus, the USSR acts in order to promote partnerships and allies, especially in the Third World. Thus, as a whole, the USSR also ends up promoting a policy of peaceful coexistence, against imperialism, driving a qualitative shift in power relations to international relations.

Pour former nos hypothèses, il fallait examiner les discours scientifiques sur le genre et leurs applications dans le cas grec, ce que nous avons essayé de faire dans notre introduction.Notre travail s’est articulé en cinq grandes parties. La première aborde la formation de la diaspora grecque de la fin du 18ème siècle aux révolutions de 1917 et les représentations féminines dans l’historiographie gréco-pontique. La deuxième partie aborde l’accès des femmes au savoir, les modes d’intégration à la nouvelle société soviétique. La conservation des rôles culturels nous mène à dresser une typologie des femmes « grecques » et des femmes « soviétiques ». La troisième s’intéresse à la reformation ou disparition des rôles au cours des répressions politiques qui affectèrent considérablement la diaspora grecque. Nous avons également dressé un bilan des femmes-victimes des purges. La dernière partie a montré enfin que l’exile constitua un moment-rupture avec le passé, au moins dans les témoignages oraux de ses protagonistes. Les femmes qui nous ont parlé d’elles-mêmes et les hommes qui se sont demandés sur les questions de genre nous ont offert une image du passé originale, digne d’intérêt. / In order to form our hypothesis, it would be necessary to examine the scientific discourse on gender and its application to the greek case, and this is what we tried to do in our introduction. Our study was organized in five large parts. The first one approaches the formation of greek diaspora from the end of the 18th century to the revolutions of 1917 and the woman representation in pontic-greek historiography. The second one approaches the access of women in education, the ways of integration in the new soviet society. The preservation of the cultural roles leads us to develop a typology between “greek” women and “soviet” women. The third part focuses on the reformation or disappearance of the roles during political repressions that would have an impact on greek diaspora. Furthermore, we discussed on the women-victims of purges. Finally, the last part demonstrates that the exile constituted a rupture with the past, at least as it resulted from its protagonists’ oral testimonies. The women who talked about themselves and the men surveyed on gender issues give us an original image of the past, worthy of interest.