State has a monopoly of the use of violence. Any state may exercise violence in two ways: either against other states or against its citizens. The latter is the most horrible way the state may treat its people for it is accompanied by the citizens’ inability to find the way out of the terror exercised by the government. Stalin’s ruling consisted in exercising violence in both the ways but at this, the citizens were the ones who suffered most of all. In his essay “State Violence as Technique” Peter Holquist states that eliminating certain categories of people, for instance “Kulaks”, was performed by Stalin with the purpose of perfecting communism; his essay is coherent and well-written, his interpretation of the state violence is not erroneous, but it seems that this work lacks empathy for the victims of Stalin terror.
To begin with, Holquist’s essay gives a perfect idea of what Soviet repression was all about. The author pays special attention to the issue of “dekulakization” as a way of filtering of people. Holquist keeps to an idea that Stalin’s filtering “Kulaks” “was employed as a tool for fashioning an idealized image of a better, purer society.” (Weiner 20) Holquist describes Stalin’s desire to “cleanse” the society of all the elements which could stand on the way of perfecting communism. One of his goals was to eradicate banditry from the Soviet Union: “The goal was to remove such tumors [as bandit elements], whether they be active or benign.” (Weiner 26)
Holquist’s essay seems logical and coherent, though some flaws can still be observed in it. The essay has a clearly defined theme, namely “State Violence as Technique”; though the ways by means of which Stalin used to exercise state violence are identified, they are not given proper explanation to. Moreover, the author introduces new terms without explaining them and the reader who deals with such notions as “Kulak” and “dekulakization” for the first time will not be able to understand what the essay is all about. Of course, the essay is aimed at a reader with advanced knowledge in Stalinism, but the author uses notions which may be difficult to comprehend even for such a reader.
Finally, Holquist interprets state violence correctly and most of his arguments can be agreed with. However, what the essay lacks is the expression of personal opinion at least indirectly. The author never mentions how much “dekulakization” influenced the lives of Soviet people whose rights and freedoms were neglected even without it; this can be equaled to discrimination for only people of definite classes were repressed. The essay contains only dry facts and produces an impression that the author does not feel any compassion for people who suffered so much from Stalin’s repressions. Holquist is neither objective nor subjective in laying out the facts; he occupied the easiest position – the position of a reporter who seems uneager to get involved into the essence of the problem as such.
In sum, Holquist’s essay “State Violence as Technique” informs about Stalin’s exercising state violence on the citizens of Soviet Union. This violence consisted in a number of repressions which added to people’s perception of Stalin as a strict and merciless ruler who was never going to abandon his idea of creating the society he himself considered perfect. The essay is logical but it lacks empathy on the part of the writer who does not seem to care about how much people had to go through during Stalin’s ruling.
Works Cited
Weiner, Amir. Landscaping the Human Garden: Twentieth-Century Population Management in a Comparative Framework. Stanford University Press, 2003