39. See Wendy Z. Goldman, Terror and Democracy in the Age of Stalin (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2007).
40. Priestland, Stalinism and the Politics of Mobilization, pp. 37-47.
41. Ibid., p. 421.
42. Eugen Weber, Varieties of Fascism: Doctrines of Revolution in the Twentieth Century (New York: D. Van Nostrand, 1964), p. 78.
43. Quoted in Gentile and Mallett, “The Sacralization of Politics,” pp. 28-29.
44. Overy, The Dictators, p. 650.
45. Felix Patrikeeff, “Stalinism, Totalitarian Society and the Politics of ‘Perfect Control,'” Totalitarian Movements and Political Religions 4, no. 1 (Summer 2003): 40.
46. Overy, The Dictators, p. 306.
47. Sheila Fitzpatrick, “Politics as Practice: Thoughts on a New Soviet Political History” in Kritika: Explorations in Russian and Eurasian History 5, no. 1 (Winter 2004): 27-54. For S. Kotkin's insight on “speaking Bolshevik,” J. Hellbeck's description of “personal Bolshevism,” and Volkov's discussion of the identitarian function of kul'turnost', see Stephen Kotkin, The Magnetic Mountain (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1995); Jochen Hellbeck, “Fashioning the Stalinist Souclass="underline" The Diary of Stepan Podlubnyi, 1931-1938,” Janrbücher für Geschichte Osteuropas, no. 2 (1997); and Vadim Volkov, “The Concept of Kul'turnost'— Notes on the Stalinist Civilizing Process,” in Stalinism—New Directions, ed. Sheila Fitzpatrick (London and New York: Routledge, 2000), pp. 210-30.
48. Michael Halberstam, “Hannah Arendt on the Totalitarian Sublime and Its Promise of Freedom,” in Hannah Arendt in Jerusalem, ed. Steven E. Aschheim (Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2001), pp. 105-23.
49. Overy, The Dictators; Peter Fritzsche, “Genocide and Global Discourse,” German History 23, no. 1 (2005): 109; Emilio Gentile, The Struggle for Modernity: Nationalism, Futurism, and Fascism (Westport, Conn.: Praeger, 2003), p. 98; Geyer, “Introduction,” in Beyond Totalitarianism, ed. Geyer and Fitzpatrick, p. 33; Emilio Gentile, The Sacralization of Politics in Fascist Italy (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1996).
50. Griffin, The Nature of Fascism, p. 193. For an extensive discussion of the relationship between “sense-making crisis” and Fascism, see Roger Griffin and Matthew Feldman, eds., Fascism: Critical Concepts in Political Science, vol. 2, The Social Dynamics of Fascism (New York: Routledge, 2004).
51. See Eric Voegelin, “The Political Religions,” in Modernity without Restraint: Collected Works (Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 2000), 5:19-74.
52. Historian Stephen Kern, quoted in Griffin, Modernism and Fascism, p. 161.
53. Hermann Rausching, Hitler Speaks (London, 1939), p. 185, quoted in Richard Pipes, Russia under the Bolshevik Regime (New York: Knopf, 1993), p. 259. Regarding the last sentence, it is worth quoting here Richard Pipes's comment: “And one may add, what Bolshevism did and what it became.”
54. The formulation belongs to Walter Benjamin, who coined it in On the Concept of History. See Griffin, Modernism and Fascism, p. 223.
55. See Nolte, La guerre civile européenne.
56. Zeev Sternhell, Neither Left nor Right: Fascist Ideology in France (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1994).
57. Robert C. Tucker, Stalin in Power: The Revolution from Above, 1928-1941 (New York: Norton, 1990); Alexander N. Yakovlev, A Century of Violence in Soviet Russia (New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 2002).
58. Timothy Snyder, “Hitler vs. Stalin: Who Killed More?” New York Review of Books Blog, March 10, 2011, p. 2, http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2011/mar/10/hitler-vs-stalin-who-killed-more/.
59. Snyder, Bloodlands, p. 391.
60. Joshua Rubenstein and Vladimir P. Naumov, Stalin's Secret Pogrom: The Postwar Inquisition of the Jewish Anti-Fascist Committee (New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 2001).
61. Martin Amis, Koba the Dread: Laughter and the Twenty Million (New York: Hyperion, 2002), p. 220.
62. Erik van Ree, “Stalin as Marxist: the Western Roots of Stalin's Russification of Marxism,” in Stalin: A New History, ed. Sarah Davies and James Harris (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005), pp. 159-80. The model van Ree describes was the blueprint transferred onto Eastern Europe. A comparative analysis of the various forms of localizing Stalinism in the region with the type of ideology extensively described by Erik van Ree in his The Political Thought of Joseph Stalin—A Study in Twentieth-Century Patriotism (London and New York: Routledge Curzon, 2002) could prove illuminating for cases such as Ceaușescu's Romania, Gomułka's Poland, Enver Hoxha's Albania, or Erich Honecker's GDR. For an example, see my notion of “national-Stalinism” in Vladimir Tismaneanu, Stalinism for All Seasons: A Political History of Romanian Communism (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2003), pp. 18-36.
63. Nolte, La guerre civile européenne, p. 47.
64. Gellately, Lenin, Stalin, and Hitler, p. 579.
65. Ibid., p. 581.
66. Nolte, La guerre civile européenne, p. 239.
67. I am developing a point made by Denis Hollier and Betsy Wing in their article “Desperanto,” in “Legacies of Antifascism,” special issue, New German Critique 67 (Winter 1996): 19-31. They discuss the cases of dissident anti-Fascists (to varying degrees from one individual to the other), such as Walter Benjamin, Georges Bataille, Ernest Hemingway, and André Malraux, and their reaction to the illogic and senselessness of the late 1930s trials in Moscow, implicitly pointing out their inevitable disenchantment and awakening (especially p. 22 and p. 26).
68. Kershaw, Hitler 1936-45, p. 573.
69. Vladislav Zubok, Zhivago's Children: The Last Russian Intelligentsia (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2009), pp. 561-62.
1. UTOPIAN RADICALISM AND DEHUMANIZATION
1. Here I take issue with those interpretations that regard Marxism as an ideological counterpart to different versions of Fascism. Whereas Marxism is doubtless a revolutionary theory, a critique of liberal-bourgeois modernity, its main thrust is related to the democratic heritage of the Enlightenment (a point also made by Shlomo Avineri). Fascism, by contrast, rejected liberal individualism and democracy without any claim to fulfilling these “mediocre” projects. There is therefore no way to invoke a “betrayed” Fascist original doctrine and therefore no possibility to think of “another Nazism” or “dissident, humanist Fascism.” For the line of thought I take issue with, see A. James Gregor, The Faces of Janus: Marxism and Fascism in the Twentieth Century (New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 2000). In a similar vein, Gorbachev's former chief ideologue, Alexander Yakovlev, found the seeds of totalitarian terror, especially the war against the peasantry, in the Communist Manifesto. In my view (and here I follow Hannah Arendt, Claude Lefort, Cornelius Castoriadis, Richard Pipes, and Robert C. Tucker), the continuity between Marx and Lenin was fundamental. Fascism, and especially Nazism, did not find its origin in a distorted interpretation of the democratic search for emancipation.