Law, Society and The Domestic Regime in Russia, in Historical Perspective

Abstract

American experts on the Soviet Union have given much of their time to discussing whether the Russian communist government is going to remain “totalitarian” or instead turn “liberal.” Journalists and scholars alike judge Soviet policies and decrees largely according to whether or not they extend more “freedom” to the Russian people. Similarly, American writers in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries almost never inquired as to what purposes the Russian imperial government's policies and decrees were actually intended to serve but only how liberal they were or were not. When one writer said that the Tsar was liberalizing, another would reply that he had not actually surrendered any of his arbitrary power and that Russia was still as oppressive as ever. In American eyes, then, the Russian state apparently cannot move except along a single line that extends from freedom to oppression, democracy to absolutism, similarity to Western institutions to dissimilarity. If Russia is not moving toward one of these poles, then she is not moving at all. Few have suggested that Russian statesmen have been operating along other lines and coping with other problems. Seldom has it occurred to American observers that the question of liberalization has actually been rather a minor one in Russian development.

The Soviet Legacy of ‘national security’ in Russian Migration Policy

“…Although the latter part of the 19 th century saw a number of important milestones in the building of foundations for the state of the rule of law and more inclusive governance, many of these changes were never meant to secure 'rights' as such, but to facilitate the better functioning of government. 9 It was not until 1934, that 'national security' became the concept which signified the consolidation of the new state formation and core features of its ideology. 10 State-building processes in post-revolutionary circumstances paved a way for this framework for governmental decision-making in the Soviet Union.…”

The Russian mafia: Expulsion of law

“…An effective and consistent law enforcement system has never existed for the mass of the people (Yanney, 1965). During the last few decades of the tsarist regime, the peasant masses continued to regard the law as an arbitrary force.…”

“…During the last few decades of the tsarist regime, the peasant masses continued to regard the law as an arbitrary force. As guardian and director of the people of the Russian nation, the tsarist administration continued to regard itself as above any legal system (Yanney, 1965). In 1917 Nicholas II abdicated, removing himself, a suitable heir, and the institution of tsardom.…”

“…In 1917 Nicholas II abdicated, removing himself, a suitable heir, and the institution of tsardom. The new communist rulers constructed a hierarchy without a legal system relying on arbitrary force to sustain their power (Yanney, 1965).…”