Normalization and Charter 77 : Violence, Commitment and Resistance in Czechoslovakia

In Czechoslovakia, the occupation of 1968 denoted the beginning of normalization , a political and societal stagnation that lasted two decades. Dissident initiative Charter 77 emerged in 1977, demanding that the leaders of the country respect human rights. The Helsinki process provided a macro-level framework that influenced opposition and dissident activities throughout Eastern Europe. The study contributes a focused empirical analysis of the period of normalization and the dissident movement Charter 77. Dissent in general is seen as an existential attitude; it can be encapsulated as a morally rationalized critical stance as derived from shared experience or interpretation of injustice, which serves as a basis for a shared collective identity comprising oppositional consciousness as one unifying factor. The study suggests that normalization can be understood as a fundamentally violent process and discusses the structural and cultural manifestations of violence with relation to Charter 77. In general, the aim of the system was to passivize the society to such an extent that it would not constitute a potential threat to the hegemonic rule of the regime. Normalization caused societal stagnation and apoliticization, but it also benefited those who accepted the new political reality. The study, however, questions the image of Czechoslovakia s allegedly highly repressive rule by showing that there was also quite considerable tolerance of Charter 77 and consideration before severe repression was brought to bear against dissidents. Furthermore, the study provides understanding of the motives and impetuses behind dissent, the strategic shifts in Charter 77 activities, and the changes in the regime s policies toward Charter 77. The study also adds new perspective on the common image of Charter 77 as a non political initiative and suggests that Charter 77 was, in fact, a political entity, an actively political one in the latter half of the 1980s. Charter 77 was a de facto hybrid of a traditional dissident initiative and an oppositional actor. Charter 77 adopted a two-dimension approach: firstly, it still emphasized its role as a citizens initiative supporting human rights, but, secondly, at the same time, it was a directly political actor supporting and furthering the development of political opposition against the ruling power.

The Vexing Case of Igor Shafarevich, a Russian Political Thinker

The Russian mathematician, academician and former dissident Igor Shafarevich (b. 1923) is commonly mentioned in Western scholarly studies on perestroika and post-perestroika-era Russian politics as one of the most notable anti-Semites and extreme nationalists of the country. This notoriety owes to Shafarevich’s old samizdat article Russophobia, which was published in 1988. The scandal surrounding Russophobia came to a head when the president of The National Academy of Sciences in the United States asked Shafarevich, its honorary member, to resign. Nothing like this had ever happened in the academy’s history. The present dissertation discusses Shafarevich’s political activities, his texts and ideas as well as their reception. Particular attention is given to Russophobia, whose detailed examination proves very clearly that its reputation as an anti-Semitic text is groundless. The reasons for Russophobia’s hasty but fierce condemnation were many, but only one was that when the Soviet system began to tumble, it was commonly assumed that a vigorous rise in anti-Semitism and extreme nationalism in the Soviet Union/Russia would be just a matter of time. Many observers were highly sensitised to detecting its signs and symptoms. The dissertation also shows that most of those to write the first criticisms of Russophobia and to liken Shafarevich to the ideologues of Nazi Germany were the same people he had criticised in Russophobia for their deterministic view of history and irrational manner of connecting things for the purpose of fanning the flames of distrust between Russia’s Jews and Russians. In retrospect, it is fairly evident that Shafarevich actually managed to effectively “neutralise” the message of many of those obsessed with the Jews among his Russian contemporaries and contributed to the fact that anti-Jewish sentiments have been a great deal less popular in post-communist Russia than so many had feared and expected. The thesis also thoroughly discusses Shafarevich’s other texts and activities before Russophobia’s appearance and after it. In the 1970s, Shafarevich was one of the best-known dissidents in the Soviet Union. He worked together with academician Andrei Sakharov in a dissidents’ unofficial human rights committee and co-operated closely with Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn before Solzhenitsyn’s exile. Then, during the chaotic years of perestroika, Shafarevich defended the basic rights of ordinary citizens and warned that the hype concerning democracy could become counterproductive if the most palpable result of the reforms was the disappearance of citizens’ basic security and elementary social justice. One of the conclusions of the thesis is that even if the world around Shafarevich has changed considerably, his views have remained essentially the same since the late 1960s and early 1970s.