Conference: Trust/Distrust in the Soviet Union

Social scientists have elucidated generalised social trust/distrust in a number of major studies recently (by Niklas Luhmann, Francis Fukuyama, Charles Tilly, Russell Hardin, Piotr Sztompka, Barbara Misztal and others), but the concept has not been much applied in historical studies. The USSR offers a peculiarly appropriate subject for such a conceptual study: its social and political history has been deeply researched, but the concept of trust/distrust has not been systematically applied to it.

During and after the 1917 revolution most of the social institutions which promote generalised trust - the church, the family, religion, the press, law courts - were undermined or subordinated to the authorities, while rapid social change disrupted all stable expectations. The civil war and the messianic-apocalyptic mentality of the Communists generated an unceasing search for enemies and intensified the resultant breakdown of trust. The same mentality, paradoxically, led individual Communists to continue trusting the party in spite of persecution and suffering.

The hypothesis the conference will explore is that the mass terror of the 1930s represented an outburst of generalised social distrust comparable with the witchhunting craze in 17th century Europe or the later 20th century terror in China and Cambodia, and that the forms of trust/distrust generated then left their permanent mark on Soviet society. Since total distrust is psychologically intolerable, many people tried to find someone to trust among the leaders, such as Stalin or Molotov, a search which might be construed - contrary to all social science theory on the subject - as 'forced trust'. Citizens would write to them directly or through the newspapers, laying out their trustworthy credentials and pleading for grievances to be rectified. Others would defend themselves against possible denunciation by improvising 'mutual protection associations' of individuals tacitly or explicitly pledged not to betray each other.

When the terror eased, such associations became the basic cells of Soviet society. The party itself wanted to end indiscriminate terror and regain popular trust by offering greater security and prosperity. Its cadres were anxious to dig in and enjoy their power and privileges undisturbed over the long term. In culture and science, collectives took shape around specific institutes, journals, theatres etc, whose members evolved intense relationships of trust - and sometimes distrust - with one another, and with their regular readers or customers. In administration and in the economy, especially the unofficial economy, before engaging in transactions, actors had to develop very sensitive antennae about whom they could trust and whom not. One might say, in fact, that trust and distrust became the principal personal preoccupation of most Soviet citizens as they sought to maximise life chances and minimise dangers. Conceptualising the dynamics of small, embattled groups is crucial therefore to understanding post- Stalin society right up to the end of the Soviet Union, and possibly even after.

Speakers will include Lev Gudkov, Catriona Kelly, Yoram Gorlitzki, Alena Ledeneva, Aleksandr Livshin, Cynthia Hooper, Denis Kozlov, Alexey Tikhomirov and Geoffrey Hosking.

Provisional Conference Programme

UCL SSEES is grateful to the British Academy for providing much of the funding for this conference.

Conference registration and enquiries via http://trustconference.eventbrite.com

The delegate fee is GBP50.00, including a buffet lunch on Friday and tea/coffee on Friday and Saturday.

UCL staff and students attend free of charge, but are required to register via eventbrite.

This page last modified Friday 3 February 2012.