Общественно-политический дискурс и советская историография истории Северо-Востока СССР в 1950-е - начале 1980-х гг.

The article discusses the socio-political discourse and scientific views on the post-Stalin history of the USSR's North-East published in the Soviet Union in the 1950s through the early 1980s. Particular attention is paid to aspects of state administration as a key factor in the regional development. In regional historiography, the author identifies three main development stages, differing in the research themes, methodology, and source base. The paper analyzes the scientific publication coverage of power and governance issues in the context of the confrontation between Dalstroy and the Communist party organs of Khabarovsk Krai, as well as the role of Magadan Oblast formation in 1953 in transforming the regional historical concept. The author shows the thesis dominant in socio-political discourse about the leading role of the Communist party organs in the development of the region and the negative influence of Dalstroy determining the framework for interpreting the region's past in scientific works. The article traces the evolution of assessing Dalstroy activities, industrial development, science, and the status of indigenous peoples in the works of historians, economists, and ethnographers, revealing differences between ideological and scientific approaches to regional studies. The author comes to the conclusion on a gradual accumulation of factual materials and overcoming of ideological cliches in the late Soviet period. It is emphasized that the Soviet historiography of the 1950s - early 1980s had serious limitations in covering the history of the North-East, due to ideological bias, limited access to archives, one-sided assessments, and suppression of inconvenient facts. Simultaneously, the emergence of studies characterized by a more balanced approach, introducing new sources into scientific circulation, raising important research questions and containing valuable factual material, is noted as the foundation for further in-depth study of the regional history.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Bulletin of the North-East Science Center
Published
2024-09-26
DOI
https://doi.org/10.34078/1814-0998-2024-3-97-107
Primary Topic
Soviet and Russian History
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Общественно-политический дискурс и советская историография истории Северо-Востока СССР в 1950-е - начале 1980-х гг.

P. S. Grebenyuk
Bulletin of the North-East Science Center
Soviet and Russian History
article

Общественно-политический дискурс и советская историография истории Северо-Востока СССР в 1950-е - начале 1980-х гг.

P. S. Grebenyuk
article en

Abstract

The article discusses the socio-political discourse and scientific views on the post-Stalin history of the USSR's North-East published in the Soviet Union in the 1950s through the early 1980s. Particular attention is paid to aspects of state administration as a key factor in the regional development. In regional historiography, the author identifies three main development stages, differing in the research themes, methodology, and source base. The paper analyzes the scientific publication coverage of power and governance issues in the context of the confrontation between Dalstroy and the Communist party organs of Khabarovsk Krai, as well as the role of Magadan Oblast formation in 1953 in transforming the regional historical concept. The author shows the thesis dominant in socio-political discourse about the leading role of the Communist party organs in the development of the region and the negative influence of Dalstroy determining the framework for interpreting the region's past in scientific works. The article traces the evolution of assessing Dalstroy activities, industrial development, science, and the status of indigenous peoples in the works of historians, economists, and ethnographers, revealing differences between ideological and scientific approaches to regional studies. The author comes to the conclusion on a gradual accumulation of factual materials and overcoming of ideological cliches in the late Soviet period. It is emphasized that the Soviet historiography of the 1950s - early 1980s had serious limitations in covering the history of the North-East, due to ideological bias, limited access to archives, one-sided assessments, and suppression of inconvenient facts. Simultaneously, the emergence of studies characterized by a more balanced approach, introducing new sources into scientific circulation, raising important research questions and containing valuable factual material, is noted as the foundation for further in-depth study of the regional history.

Bulletin of the North-East Science Center(3)
Openalex Percentile: Top 74%
Soviet and Russian History
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.