Master of Arts, The Ohio State University, 2008, Graduate School

Committee: Not Provided (Other) Subjects:

BA, Oberlin College, 2020, Theater

Concept and process for a director's capstone in theatre on A Warsaw Melody by Leonid Zorin.

Committee: Paul Moser (Advisor); Justin Emeka (Committee Member); Tim Scholl (Committee Member) Subjects: Russian History; Slavic Studies; Theater

Doctor of Philosophy, The Ohio State University, 2020, History

This dissertation examines Communist Party propaganda and agitation (agitprop) in Kazakhstan, both the mechanics of agitprop production and dissemination, as well as the influence that agitprop had on the Kazakh populace during the Stalinist era in the Soviet Union (1929-1953). It argues that authorities in Moscow did not dictate Communist Party agitprop content and preferred to leave the responsibility of propaganda creation and dissemination to propagandists (agitprop workers) at the grassroots level. This heavy reliance on low-ranking agitprop workers proved problematic in Kazakhstan because most did not receive sufficient training to convey complex Marxist political theories to a largely illiterate population. In fact, many Kazakh propagandists were themselves semi-literate. Under-qualified agitprop workers resulted in shortcomings with propaganda production and dissemination, including teachings that ran against the official ideology. These shortcomings undermined the potency of Communist Party propaganda to educate and transform the Kazakh populace into modern Soviet citizens.

Committee: David Hoffmann (Advisor); Nicholas Breyfogle (Committee Member); Scott Levi (Committee Member); Sarah Schoppe-Sullivan (Committee Member) Subjects: History

Master of Arts, University of Toledo, 2018, Philosophy

This paper is a five-chapter exploration into the relationship between a Hobbesian notion of sovereignty, and the implementation of Marxism in the Soviet Union. The political philosophy of Thomas Hobbes has been most often interpreted through a particular reading of the German Carl Schmitt, which. as a result, has rendered Hobbesian philosophy synonymous with a strict, authoritarian nationalism like the Nazi party in Germany. However, simplifying the role of sovereign authority Nazism misses the strong parallels present between the relationship of the sovereign and the commonwealth, and the implementation of Marxism under Josef Stalin's rule in the Soviet Union. This model, wherein the Soviet citizens have been removed from the political realm forms an analogous relationship to what is present under the Hobbesian social contract. This is not to say that Marxism can be read back to Hobbes, but, rather, that Stalin's leadership implemented a version of the social contract which inadvertently drew upon Hobbesian influence. Through an assembling of primary and secondary sources, this thesis aims to show that a left-leaning reading of Hobbes is not only possible, but has a real-world example to draw upon.

Committee: Benjamin Grazzini PhD. (Committee Chair); Ammon Allred PhD (Committee Member); Roberto Padilla PhD (Committee Member) Subjects: Philosophy

Doctor of Philosophy, The Ohio State University, 2016, History

This dissertation analyzes secret military cooperation between the Soviet Union and Germany from 1920 until 1933. Both states found themselves internationally isolated after World War I. Unable to meet their own security needs – despite immense ideological differences – they turned to each other in an unlikely partnership. Together, they established a network of secret military bases, testing grounds and laboratories inside Russia, where they jointly developed new aircraft, armored vehicles, and chemical weapons. Their work together provided a dark glimpse of the future: Soviet military intelligence reports chronicled the rise of pro-Nazi sentiment among the German officers. German intelligence in turn described the growing cult of Stalin and the scenes of mass starvation unfolding right outside the gates of their facilities in the wake of collectivization. And both sides practiced human experimentation in their joint chemical weapons facilities. But cooperation between the two states was more than just a harbinger of what was to come: the new ideas, technologies, and factories developed in this period of cooperation would serve a vital role in the course and conduct of the coming war. At its core, the interwar exchange of Russian space for German technology was a wager upon which the Second World War depended.

Committee: Jennifer Siegel (Advisor); Peter Mansoor (Committee Member); David Hoffmann (Committee Member); Alan Beyerchen (Committee Member) Subjects: History; Technology

Master of Arts, Miami University, 2014, History

The thesis explores the relationship between the spatial relations of the first line of the Leningrad Metro system, completed in 1955, and subjectivity in the post-war Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. Soviet subways were not simply mechanisms by which one travelled; often referred to as "underground palaces," these facilities featured art and architecture that informed passengers about the history, and the future, of the Soviet Union. Thus, the metro offers a glimpse of how the USSR conceived of itself and its position along the dialectical path to communism. I argue that the messages in the underground's walls, and the memoirs of the workers who constructed them, suggest that many of the reforms often associated with Nikita Khrushchev's Thaw period were actually well under way during Iosif Stalin's lifetime.

Committee: Stephen Norris (Advisor); Robert Thurston (Committee Member); Margaret Ziolkowski (Committee Member) Subjects: History

PHD, Kent State University, 2013, College of Arts and Sciences / Department of Political Science

While Joseph Stalin is commonly reviled in the West as a murderous tyrant who committed egregious human rights abuses against millions of his own people, in Russia he is often positively viewed as the symbol of Soviet-era stability and state power. How can there be such a disparity in perspectives? Utilizing an ethnographic approach, extensive interview data, and critical discourse analysis, this study concludes that the political elite in Russia are able to control and manipulate historical discourse about the Stalinist period in order to create a version of the past that bolsters their own political preferences. Appropriating the Stalinist discourse, they minimize or ignore outright crimes of the Soviet period, and instead focus on positive aspects of Stalin's rule, such as leading the Soviet Union to victory in the Second World War. Advancing concepts of “preventive” and “comprehensive” co-optation, this study analyzes how the political elite in Russia inhibit the emergence of groups that provide alternate narratives or narratives that contradict the elite-driven discourse, while promoting message-friendly groups that bolster elite preferences. Bringing the resources of the state to bear, the Russian elite are able to co-opt multiple avenues of discourse formulation and dissemination. Elite-sponsored discourse positions Stalin as a symbol of a strong, centralized state that was capable of many achievements, enabling favorable portrayals of Stalin as part of a tradition of harsh rulers in Russian history, along the lines of Peter the Great. Implicitly, this strong state discourse is used to legitimize the return of authoritarianism that Russia has experienced.

Committee: Andrew Barnes Ph.D (Committee Co-Chair); Julie Mazzei Ph.D (Committee Co-Chair); Patrick Coy Ph.D (Committee Member); Kenneth Bindas Ph.D (Committee Member) Subjects: Political Science

Master of Liberal Studies, University of Toledo, 2009, History

A thesis presented on the American public opinion of Josef Stalin before and after World War II beginning with how Russia and Stalin was portrayed in the media before the war began, covering how opinions shifted with major events such as the famine, collectivization, the Great Terror, wartime conferences, the Cold War and McCarthyism.

Committee: Lawrence Anderson PhD (Committee Chair); Michael Jakobson PhD (Advisor); Larry Connin PhD (Committee Member) Subjects: European History; History; Russian History

MA, Kent State University, 2009, College of Arts and Sciences / Department of History

A Serbian-dominated monarchy controlled the Kingdom of Yugoslavia after the Great War. To a certain extent, the monarchy was oppressive and unfavorable towards communism, as was often the case in the interwar period. During the escalation of World War II, the German war machine pressed surrounding states in a retributive fashion and extended its tentacles. States fell to the might of their collective enemy. As the panzer divisions brought lightning to the nations, initial resistance in occupied territories was scant, save for Yugoslavia, where defiant and opposing factions, General Draza Mihailovic's monarchic Nationalists and Josip Broz's communist Partisans, sought to rid themselves of the Germans—and each other. Allied resistance to the Axis became necessary. American President Franklin Roosevelt and British Prime Minister Winston Churchill opted to capitalize on the resistance and lend support. Initially, the Allies supported both factions against the Axis occupiers but the Nationalists sought the preservation of King Peter II, by then exiled to England; the Partisans desired to usurp power and there was the fear by the Western Allies that Yugoslavia would be taken over by communists. The divided country would be in a state of disarray. As the war trudged on, the Allies eventually withdrew support for Mihailovic and backed only Tito for a variety of reasons. After the war, Allied notables regretted this decision. There is ample evidence showing that this decision was incorrect and that regret was justified. This thesis discusses the background of the conditions in Yugoslavia and the facts surrounding the Allied decision to permanently downgrade Mihailovic, paving the way for communist rule in post-war Yugoslavia. Especially, it will focus on the policy of the British under Churchill and Roosevelt's knowledge of the circumstances, which culminated in the dismissal of General Mihailovic.

Committee: Solon Victor Papacosma Ph.D. (Advisor); Kevin Adams Ph.D. (Committee Member); Mary Ann Heiss Ph.D. (Committee Member) Subjects: European History

Master of Arts, The Ohio State University, 2013, History

This thesis attempts to explain the continued presence of Vladimir Lenin's image in Joseph Stalin's cult of personality in the postwar era, long after the General Secretary no longer had to rely on his predecessor's image or persona to legitimize his power over the Soviet Union. While the presence of Lenin's image in the Stalin cult varied in both frequency and form, it continued to inform the imagery of Stalin cult up until the Soviet dictator's death in 1953 and the placement of his body alongside Lenin's in the newly christened Lenin-Stalin Mausoleum on Red Square. This thesis argues that the visual imagery of Stalin's cult used the image and persona of Vladimir Lenin as the founder of the Soviet state to legitimize Stalin's rule over the Soviet Union, and later to aggrandize the image of the General Secretary. This work also examines the changing purpose and nature of the Stalin cult, as well as the effect that World War II had on Stalin's image. It posits that before World War II, the main purpose of the visual imagery of the Stalin cult was to legitimize Stalin's rule over the Soviet Union, as well as his plans for constructing socialism through collectivization and industrialization. With victory over Nazi Germany in World War II and its legitimization of Stalin's rule and policies, the purpose of the Stalin cult changed from legitimizing Stalin's rule to aggrandizing his image. This thesis ultimately concludes that while the Stalin cult propelled the image of the Soviet dictator to near god-like heights of grandeur as a result of the victory in World War II, such resplendent depictions of Stalin relied heavily on the symbolic power of Lenin's image within, and at times outside of, the Stalin cult in order elevate the General Secretary to such glorified heights.

Committee: David Hoffmann (Advisor); Nicholas Breyfogle (Committee Member); Gleb Tsipursky (Committee Member) Subjects: History