Neo-Sovietism, sometimes known asRe-Sovietization, is theSoviet Union–style of policy decisions in somepost-Soviet states, as well as apolitical movement of reviving the Soviet Union in the modern world or reviving specific aspects of Soviet life based onnostalgia for the Soviet Union.[1][2]
According toPamela Druckerman ofThe New York Times, an element of neo-Sovietism is that "the government manages civil society, political life and the media".[3]
According toMatthew Kaminski ofThe Wall Street Journal, it includes efforts by Vladimir Putin to express the glory of the Soviet Union in order to generate support for a "revived Great Russian power in the future" by bringing back memories of various Russian accomplishments that legitimatized Soviet dominance, including the Soviet victory againstNazi Germany. Kaminski continues on by saying that neo-Sovietism "offers up Russianjingoism stripped bare of Marxist internationalist pretenses" and uses it to scare Russia's neighbours and to generateRussian patriotism andanti-Americanism.[4]
Andrew Meier of theLos Angeles Times in 2008 listed three points that laid out neo-Sovietism and how modern Russia resembles the Soviet Union:[5]
Some commentators have said thatRussian PresidentVladimir Putin holds many neo-Soviet views, especially concerning law and order and military strategic defense.[6]
Alexander Baunov, a senior fellow at theCarnegie Endowment for International Peace, claimed that Russia was undergoing the re-Sovietization of its democratic process, together with the re-Sovietization "of the whole Russian life."[7] Baunov theorized that "Vladimir Putin is reconstructing...the environment, the time, the impressions of his youth [in the Soviet Union]," noting that under Putin's administration, Russia has reverted to many of the same norms with regards to political culture, society, and statecraft as the Soviet Union during the pre-Glasnost era.[7]
In 2021, Jim Heintz of theAssociated Press describedBelarus as a neo-Soviet state due to the authoritarian nature ofAlexander Lukashenko's government and its largely state-controlled economy.[8]
According to Belarusian journalist Franak Viačorka, Belarus “clung to the traditions, symbols, and narratives of the USSR with more enthusiasm than any other former Soviet republic.”[9] Viačorka asserts that the Belarusian government has deliberately retained many of "the specific statecraft and economic practices of the Communist era."[9] Examples cited by Viačorka includeKomsomol-style political youth organizations to obligatory university studies of the Soviet war effort against Nazi Germany.[9]
A study by theTrans European Policy Studies Association described the Belarusian government's economic policies as neo-Soviet, due to the country's lack of well-defined private property rights and continued domination of the industrial sector bystate-owned enterprises inherited from the Soviet Union.[10]
In his bookBelarus: The Last European Dictatorship, political scientist Andrew Wilson described the Belarusian state ideology as neo-Soviet.[11] Wilson noted that many authoritarian institutions inherited from theByelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic were preserved in Belarus after independence, including the local branch of theState Security Committee (KGB).[11] Like its Soviet predecessor, the Belarusian government also retained strong control over mass media and the press, and even produced similar state propaganda.[11]
Andrew Kramer of theNew York Times claimed that theLuhansk People's Republic andDonetsk People's Republic established byRussian separatist forces in Ukraine were neo-Soviet states.[12] Kramer observed that the separatist legislatures were modeled after theSupreme Soviet, local industry was nationalized and seized by the separatist governments, and Soviet eraagricultural collectives were revived.[12] He also pointed out that some of the separatist political leaders, such asBoris Litvinov, were former dedicated members of theCommunist Party of the Soviet Union, and remained sympathetic towards socialist ideology.[12]
