#1UKRAINIAN JEW AND STALIN'S DEPUTY: AN EXAMINATION OF SOVIET-JEWISH RELATIONS THROUGH THE LIFE OF LAZAR MOISEYEVICH KAGANOVICH Della Huffines A thesis submitted to the faculty at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in the Global Studies Department in the College of Arts and Sciences. Chapel Hill 2023 Approved by: Chad Bryant Eren Tasar Eliza Rose#2© 2023 Della Huffines ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ii#3ABSTRACT Della Huffines: Ukrainian Jew and Stalin's Deputy: An Examination of Soviet-Jewish Relations through the Life of Lazar Moiseyevich Kaganovich (Under the direction of Chad Bryant) Scholars, particularly historians, cite Lazar Kaganovich's life as holding great importance to the development of the Soviet Union. However, Kaganovich's life, as it relates to the broader Jewish experience, has gone largely unexamined. This thesis attempts to bridge that gap by presenting Kaganovich on his own terms, rather than as a lens for understanding Stalinism, as he has primarily been used in the past. Specifically, this thesis examines Kaganovich's life and career, as he presents it in his memoir, in relation to the broader Soviet Jewish experience. I argue that Kaganovich's life shared many similarities with the broader Jewish community before 1917, but his dedication to Bolshevism, access to power, and dismissal of his Jewish background let him climb the ranks of Soviet power until he eventually became one of Stalin's top deputies. E: 111#4INTRODUCTION. CHAPTER I............. CHAPTER II CONCLUSION BIBLIOGRAPHY TABLE OF CONTENTS iv 1 11 .37 .57 .61#5INTRODUCTION In a 1947 picture taken in Kiev, a large group walks in a demonstration carrying posters of Soviet leaders. Directly beside the poster of Stalin is one of a dark-haired man with a large mustache and piercing gaze. The same man appears in numerous photographs with men in the highest ranks of the Communist Party, and often he is seen with Stalin. In a 1953 photograph, he stands especially somber next to Bulganin and Voroshilov near Stalin's corpse during the state funeral in Moscow. This man is Lazar Moiseyevich Kaganovich, a name once widely known and acclaimed in the Soviet Union, but almost gone from public memory by the late 1960s. Prior to 1955, the famous Moscow Metro was even named after him, the man attributed with its design and creation. Lazar Kaganovich is one of the many men who served under Stalin and formed his inner circle. He held various positions throughout his career, from First Secretary of the Communist Party in Ukraine in the 1920s, to Stalin's Deputy and Moscow 'Party Boss' in the 1930s. His dedication to Communism and his relentless work ethic earned him the title 'Iron Lazar' from his admirers. Kaganovich also headed a plethora of commissariats during his career, and he played an especially large role in Stalin's collectivization efforts, resulting famines, and the Great Purge of the late 1930s. Lazar Kaganovich's life is cited across numerous historical sources about Stalinism and Soviet Politics as holding great importance to the development of the Soviet Union. However, scholars, and particularly historians, of Stalinism and the Soviet Union have, for the most part, not closely examined his personal background and the nature of his role in the Soviet#6government. For a man who is often described as being the second most powerful figure in Soviet politics behind Stalin in the 1930s, there are very few sources about his life. These limited sources are primarily articles or side mentions in other works. In the English selection of Soviet biographies, only one reliable full-length account of his life exists.² Additionally, Kaganovich's incredibly prominent role in the Soviet Union is unique given his Jewish background and the fact that he was the only Jewish individual to hold such a high position and remain so close to Stalin for so long. His life and later years in power occurred simultaneously with a fascinating period of transition within the Jewish community of the late Russian Empire and following Soviet Union, but his Jewish background is often treated by scholars as an afterthought rather than a point for closer examination. Kaganovich, like many others at the time, rejected his Jewish roots, but they nevertheless impacted his life and career. It was the realization that Kaganovich was so prominent and fascinating, yet received so little individual analysis, that sparked the thesis below. The one English-language biography, Iron Lazar, which currently exists about Kaganovich is solid and well-written, but the analysis that author E. A. Rees draws from his research is focused more on Kaganovich's role in the Stalinist system and less on the development of Kaganovich as an individual and politician through his upbringing and personal experiences. In fact, Rees is explicit in his classification of his work as a larger examination of Stalinist politics from above - a case study which illustrates "the evolution of the leadership of 1 For example, Kaganovich is regularly referenced by historians such as Oleg Khlevniuk in Master of the House, and by Shelia Fitzpatrick in On Stalin's Team, but these works, like Rees' biography examine him in relation to Stalin, rather than on his own terms as he saw and described himself. 2 I categorize E. A. Rees' biography of Kaganovich, Iron Lazar, as official in reference to the one notorious unofficial biography of Kaganovich, titled Wolf of the Kremlin. This unofficial account was written by a man who claimed to be Kaganovich's American nephew, but he and his book are widely disregarded as absurd and highly inaccurate by both historians and Kaganovich's family.#7the Soviet regime.”³ Although Rees also notes how the biography examines the role of an individual within a system and thus addresses themes of agency, intention, motivation, and contribution, the study is nevertheless directed towards understanding Stalinism and the Soviet political system as opposed to Kaganovich himself. Ultimately, he argues that Kaganovich's refusal to denounce Stalin and his own past wrongdoings after 1953 was the most extreme example of Bolshevik ideology and Party adherence and is overall representative of the closed- system nature of the Soviet Union. Furthermore, while other alternatives to the Stalinist system existed, the system that was in place, as created by Stalin, was ultimately unable to adapt to necessary changes required by a modernizing society. * Rees thus uses Kaganovich as a metaphor for the Stalinist system and the loyalty it demanded. While recognizing the personal can rarely be separated from the political, especially in the highest ranks of Soviet Party life, my aim in this thesis is to use the personal to understand Kaganovich on his own terms, rather than use him as a lens for understanding Stalinist politics. Specifically, I have chosen to analyze Kaganovich's Jewish background in order to understand his life in the context of the broader Soviet Jewish experience. To do this, I rely heavily on three primary sources by and about Kaganovich. First and foremost is Kaganovich's memoir, titled Memoirs of a Worker, Bolshevik-Communist, Trade Union, Party and Soviet-State Worker. This work was written between the mid-1960s to 1985 as a testament to his life, Party loyalty, and strict adherence to the tenants of Communism. Beyond this, I also use Felix Chuev's book Thus Spoke Kaganovich: The Confession of Stalin's Apostle. Published in 1992, this work is a compilation of conversations and interviews between Chuev and Kaganovich in the 1980s. 3 E. A. Rees, Iron Lazar: A Political Biography of Lazar Kaganovich, (London: Anthem Press, 2012), xv. 4 E. A. Rees, Iron Lazar, 279. 3#8Finally, I also use the collection of letters sent between Stalin and Kaganovich from 1931-1936. These three sources, in addition to a variety of secondary articles and books, have been invaluable to my understanding of Kaganovich as he saw himself, particularly in relation to his Jewish identity, and the role he played in the Soviet Union. It is necessary to note that because the aim of this thesis is to examine Kaganovich as he presents his own life through his memoir, there are important portions of his story that I cover in far less detail. Specifically, I do not cover the crimes and atrocities he supported and committed in depth - this is because Kaganovich himself does not address these topics in extensive detail. My decision to omit a significant discussion of Kaganovich's crimes is not in any way a statement of support, ignorance, or complacency for his actions and the suffering he caused. Rather, it reflects the limited scope of this project and an attempt to remain true to the goal of examining Kaganovich's life as he himself presents it. The Sources in Context Before analyzing the content within the primary sources that I use in this thesis it is necessary to position them in their specific contexts. The leading source for my work is Kaganovich's memoir, written primarily from the mid-1960s to 1985. This source emerged following Kaganovich's expulsion from the Party due to his unwavering support of Stalin and his hardline Communist beliefs that were inconsistent with the new official Party direction under Nikita Khrushchev. Once close friends and allies, Khrushchev and Kaganovich had a falling out after Stalin's death and amid the rise of de-Stalinization. Kaganovich names Molotov, Malenkov, and Shepilov as the men expelled along with him, but there were others beyond these 5 I also do not cover the topic of Soviet crimes in Ukraine in detail for the same reason I have not covered Kaganovich's crimes in extensive detail. The addition of this note is particularly relevant given the recent developments in world events following Russia's invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. Kaganovich and his life hold even greater relevancy because of his Ukrainian nationality and influence in Ukrainian politics at different points throughout his career. There is much to examine about the connection between Kaganovich, the Soviet Union, and Ukraine, and I hope to pursue further research on this topic in the future. 4#9four. Kaganovich's removal from his roles and status within the Party occurred in mid to late 1957 after Kaganovich, along with Malenkov and Molotov, were accused by Khrushchev of leading an Anti-Party group because of their reluctance to denounce Stalin in favor of the new Party path. Kaganovich was demonized even more so than the rest because of his lifelong commitment to Stalin and his outspoken refusal to denounce him even after Khrushchev's secret speech.7 Eventually, Kaganovich, Molotov, and Malenkov relented to Khrushchev on June 28, 1957. They denounced their actions, Stalin, and performed self-criticism before the Central Committee. They also submitted letters admitting to past errors and confessed to crimes and conspiring against Khrushchev. The following day, the Central Committee officially denounced and expelled the three men from the Communist Party. That same year, Kaganovich lost his role as minister for the construction materials industry and moved out of his Kremlin apartment to one on Lenin Hills with his wife. Kaganovich, demonized and denounced, now worked as manager of the Urals Potash Works in Solikamsk - a position that was a dramatic step down from his previous role as Stalin's preeminent follower and aid. Then, in 1961 Kaganovich's wife Maria Markovna passed away. She was a close Party ally, best friend, and wife of 50 years. Her passing left Kaganovich to face one of his hardest periods in life alone. In 1961, Kaganovich was also removed from his role with the Urals Potash Works. Now living as a pensioner in his forced retirement, Kaganovich turned to individual 6 L. M. Kaganovich, Pamiatnye zapiski rabochego, kommunista-bol'shevika, profsoiuznogo, partiĭnogo i sovetsko-gosudarstvennogo rabotnika, (Moskva: Vagrius, 1996.), 13. 7 E. A. Rees, Iron lazar, 257-8. 8 Kaganovich, however, remained loyal to Stalin. 9 Kaganovich, Pamiatnye zapiski, 13. 5#10propaganda work among students, friends, workers, and neighbors, and also rededicated himself to self-education. Kaganovich, in his own words, overcame these struggles like a Bolshevik and increased his devotion to Communist ideology. 10 As a result, his memoirs followed. These two tragedies, one personal and one political, form the background that colors the tone and direction of Kaganovich's memoir. From the preface, he is clear that the goal of writing his memoirs is not to remove himself from the obscurity that he had fallen into, but rather to advance the Communist Party. He articulates his aim to produce a work of strong ideological conviction that shapes facts from the past into “a sharp weapon for the modern and future struggles of communists.”11 He also intended for the book to serve as an inspiration for the younger generations. Furthermore, Kaganovich articulated his role not as a memoirist, but a Bolshevik memoirist. To Kaganovich, the memoirist must follow "the main law that stands before every historian," to view facts objectively as external observers, or "falconers of history" as he calls them. 12 Instead, Kaganovich viewed his role as a Bolshevik memoirist differently - someone who writes with their ideological and revolutionary Party position in mind at all times to cover the facts and events of the past and predict the future. 13 Kaganovich's memoir is thus not an objective account of the Soviet Union and his role in it, nor was it ever intended to be. Kaganovich is startlingly transparent with his ideological positioning and biases, but this is not a detriment of the source but rather a strength. Kaganovich lived his whole life as a devout Communist and Stalin-supporter, even until his death in 1991 at age 97, mere months before his beloved Union collapsed. It would not be fitting for a man so 10 Ibid. 11 Ibid, 15. 12 Ibid, 16. 13 Ibid.#11ideologically driven to write a memoir inconsistent with his beliefs, and thus this source, in its biases, stands as a testament to his ideological fervor, perhaps the most prominent aspect of his entire character. Underlying the memoir is the continuous theme of Kaganovich's desire to be readmitted to the Party. The second primary source I rely on also carries this theme. Thus Spoke Kaganovich, written by Felix Chuev, is a compilation of meetings and conversations between Chuev and Kaganovich that occurred over a period of roughly five years in the mid-1980s. 14 This book is much shorter than Kaganovich's memoir but nevertheless contains fascinating and vital insights into his life and thoughts. Like the memoir, Thus Spoke Kaganovich begins with a declaration of ideological purity and a call for the victory of Communism over the post-Stalinist era relaxations of Party control and ideological fervor. Additionally, the content of this work is in many ways more open and relaxed than the memoir. Finally, the third main primary source I use is the collection of letters between Stalin and Kaganovich from 1931-1936. Beginning in 1931, these letters were written when Stalin was not in Moscow and Kaganovich was left in charge of the Politburo in his absence. The 177 letters included in the volume range in topic from shorter, more personal communications to longer pieces about the major issues plaguing the country and potential solutions. These letters are very insightful into the pressing issues that occurred between 1931-1936, primarily agriculture production issues and overseeing collectivization. The letters also portray Stalin and Kaganovich as leaders and individuals and highlight some of their opinions on other figures within the Party. The combination of these three primary sources, with Kaganovich's memoir playing the 14 Feliks, Chuev, Tak govoril Kaganovich: ispoved' stalinskogo apostola, (Moskva: "Otechestvo;" [S.1.]: Distributed by East View Publications, 1992). 7#12most important role, forms the basis of my thesis. Together they represent both Kaganovich's thoughts on his life in the moment and his recollections after the events occurred. Project Components By examining Kaganovich through these sources, I aim to place the life of one of Stalin's top deputies in the larger context of Jewish identity, nationality, and politics in the Soviet Union. Specifically, I look at Kaganovich's Jewish experience in the Soviet Union and in the top levels of the Soviet government and attempt to understand how he viewed his Jewishness and how his life fits into the larger narrative of the Soviet-Jewish experience. While keeping the overall context of the broader Jewish experience in mind, I ask two separate but connected questions about Kaganovich's life. First, how does Kaganovich's youth compare to the concept of the Jewish revolution as described by Yuri Slezkine, as well as Andrew Sloin, Inna Shtakser, and Scott Ury? By contrasting Kaganovich's experience as a Jewish youth against this concept of the Jewish revolution, which is explained in more detail below, I argue that Kaganovich was, in many ways, a strong example, but his dedication to Bolshevism ultimately separated him from the movement and contributed to his rise in power. Next, I ask a different, but highly related question of what became of Kaganovich's Jewishness during his rise and dominance in Soviet politics. Here I argue that Kaganovich left the Jewish revolution behind through his political success and also left behind his Jewishness entirely. Kaganovich's Jewish background affected him very little during his years in power, despite the eventual rise of anti-Semitism in the Soviet Union and different eras of tense Jewish- Soviet relations. Additionally, I show that Kaganovich was allowed to succeed in such a way because of his unwavering faith in Stalin and Bolshevism, and his erasure of his Jewish past. To correspond with these questions, I have divided this thesis and Kaganovich's life into the two time periods. The first is defined by transformation and the second by integration. The 8#13first period includes the final years of the Russian Empire and the Bolshevik Revolution through the formation of the Soviet Union in 1922. These years contain both some of the worst years of anti-Semitism under the tsars as well as the transition to a more accepting society under socialism, at least in theory. Additionally, this time frame is the most relevant to the concept of the Jewish revolution Essentially, the Jewish revolution is a term broadly used by numerous authors to define the period of transition that occurred within the Jewish community around the time between the 1905 Russian Revolution and the 1917 Bolshevik Revolution. It is important to note that while the term focuses on the years at the end of the nineteenth century and the beginning of the twentieth century, the Jewish revolution was not a set movement with clear temporal or geographic boundaries, but rather it is a theoretical term which describes a period of immense change within large portions of the Jewish community. During this time, significant portions of the Jewish population, particularly in the Russian Empire, were leaving behind tradition and religion in favor of modernity, revolution, secular education, integration into Russian society, and moving from the countryside to larger cities. Kaganovich's life shows major overlaps with this path. Yuri Slezkine and Andrew Sloin both examine this concept of the Jewish revolution in the 1917 era, but unlike Slezkine, Sloin argues that the Jewish revolution ended in 1917 when it was engulfed by the larger Bolshevik Revolution. 15 Additionally, Scott Ury and Inna Shtakser argue similar points about Jewish cultural transformation, though they both focus primarily on the 1905 Revolution. I rely on all four authors' broad arguments of the Jewish revolution, while paying particular attention to Slezkine's analysis because his book, The Jewish Century, offers the most 15 Andrew Sloin, The Jewish revolution in Belorussia: Economy, Race, and Bolshevik Power, (Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 2017), 246.#14comprehensive look at this theoretical concept during the 1917 era and into the later Soviet Union. 16 After the first chapter examines the Jewish revolution, the years between 1922 and the mid-1940s will serve as the second chapter. During this period the Soviet Union pursued different policies towards Jewish nationalism in an attempt to answer the Soviet 'Jewish Question.' Additionally, these years encompass Kaganovich's most impactful years in office and represent his full rise to power. 16 Yuri Slezkine, The Jewish Century, (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 2004), 220-224. 10#15CHAPTER I The first chapter of this thesis will cover the era between the last decades of the Russian Empire through the Bolshevik Revolution and Civil War, concluding with the formation of the Soviet Union in 1922. This period in Russian history is filled with military action and political and social changes. Additionally, it represents a period of immense change within the Jewish communities in Russia and the territories of the Russian Empire. Before placing Kaganovich and his experiences into the broader Jewish experiences of the time, I will first provide a brief section of historical background. Background In Jews and Revolution in Nineteenth-Century Russia, Erich Haberer traces the roots of Jewish revolutionary activity back to the mid-1800s, under the reign of Nicholas I. He argues that the 1844 reform law, “On Establishing Special Schools for the Education of Jewish Youths," played the largest role in the ideological changes within the Jewish communities in the Pale. He argues that the law resulted in large numbers of Jews eventually becoming involved in 17 revolutionary work. The law, which was implemented in 1847, most importantly gave Jews "their own modern public system of primary and secondary education."18 This new education system for Jews was impactful in part because of its emphasis on the teachings of the Jewish Enlightenment, the Haskalah, which originated in eighteenth century Berlin. As Haberer shows, 17 Erich Haberer, Jews and Revolution in Nineteenth-Century Russia, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995), 9. 18 Haberer, Jews and Revolution in Nineteenth-Century Russia, 9. 11#16in its most radical form, the Haskalah represented "the secular educated Jewish intellectual, who, alienated from traditional Judaism and isolated from Russian society, sought salvation in revolution."19 Haberer demonstrates the link between the Haskalah movement and the 1844 Jewish educational reform law when he notes that "within a decade of the new law on Jewish education, the Pale of Settlement was spun with a network of Haskalah-based schools, irrevocably rooting the Haskalah in Russia's still predominately traditionalist community.”20 Though the traditional Jewish community was still predominant, the new education system paved the way for significant levels of Jewish involvement in revolutionary activity in the years to follow. Haberer concludes that "the end result of this institutionalization of the Haskalah was the formation of a full-fledged Russian-Jewish intelligentsia that was to shape modern Jewish cultural life well into the 1870s."21 Jewish involvement in notable revolutionary movements in the late 1880s demonstrates this impact. For example, by the 1880s, “Jews made up about 17 percent of all male and 27.3 percent of all female activists of the People's Will," a revolutionary terrorist group in the late Russian Empire. 22 By 1905, Jews often represented large percentages of political deportees and prisoners (such as 37 percent in January 1905 compared to 41.9 percent of Russians).23 Inna Shtakser also notes the importance of the Haskalah in creating the secular Jewish community. She argues, "while the Haskalah was about combining Jewish religion with 19 Ibid, 4-5. 20 Ibid, 5. 21 Ibid, 10. 22 Slezkine, The Jewish Century, 151. 23 Ibid. 12#17integration into the non-Jewish society, its unintended aftermath offered a secular Jewish identity to the educated."24 By the time of the 1905 Revolution, Jews had suffered anti-Semitic sentiments and laws from the tsarist government for centuries. The Pale of Settlement is a prime example, as it was created in 1791 to delineate legal boundaries to restrict the territories where Jews could live and work.25 More recently, as Jonathan Frankel notes in Prophecy and Politics, the period between 1881 and 1917 was particularly difficult for Jews under Alexander III and Nicholas II. During this era Jews suffered from “a population explosion, chronic under-employment (and unemployment), poverty; by periodic waves of pogroms and governmental harassment; by a massive emigration" and more. 26 Alexander III was particularly harsh on Jews during his reign, which ended in 1894. Government officials had shown their lack of willingness to stop pogroms, and in many cases actually encouraged them. Often, Jewish families were also forcibly evicted from large cities, such as Moscow, and forced to relocate to the Pale. 27 Simultaneous to these years of crisis among Russian Jews was a period of noticeable decline within the Russian imperial government, economy, and military. From a defeat in Crimea at the Hands of the Ottomans, the British, and the French in 1856, to rising political strife and terrorism from failed reforms and the unsatisfactory emancipation of serfs under Alexander II, the Russian empire was in a weakened position at home and abroad. The creation of the Duma during the Revolution of 1905 was a result of these continuous struggles. The new legislative 24 Shtakser, The Making of Jewish revolutionaries, 11. 25 Alfred D. Low, Soviet Jewry and Soviet Policy, (Boulder, CO: East European Monographs, 1990), 13. 26 Frankel, Prophecy and Politics: Socialism, Nationalism, and the Russian Jews, 1862-1917, 1. 27 Ibid, 138. 13#18body was a sign to many that there was hope for political change in the future. Unfortunately, the autocracy which was supposedly over in 1905 did not actually end because Nicholas II retained much of his autocratic authority and never seriously committed to establishing a more liberal democratic form of government. Nicolas II also blamed Jews for the turmoil in Russia. Life for Jews changed due to new restrictions placed on their admission to the bar and ability to join universities. 28 As Richard Wortman argues, 1905 should not be seen solely as a revolution that failed to end an autocratic government, but rather "a collision of two fiercely opposed insurgent forces, a Russia awakening politically and demanding to be heard and a monarch 9929 seeking to create pure autocracy.' Jews were no less involved in this political awakening than other groups across the empire. The Russian Revolution of 1905 was a major turning point for not only the Russian Empire, but the Jewish community as well. In the Russian Empire there were many legal and social restrictions on ethnic and national minorities and the Jews were no exception. In many cases, Jews often faced heavy restrictions and limitations to the point that people came to associate tsarism with anti-Semitism. 30 Because of this, 1905 gave many Jews hope for a change in direction from the drastically anti-Semitic tsarist past to a brighter future. 31 Despite its less-than-ideal outcome, the 1905 Revolution served as a major avenue for social change within the Jewish community among young Jews who turned to revolutionary work. These youths revolted not only against the government, but their own Jewishness as well. 28 Richard Wortman, Russian Monarchy: Representation and Rule. (Boston: Academic Studies Press, 2013), 216. 29 Wortman, Russian Monarchy: Representation and Rule, 218. 30 Slezkine, 238. 31 Johnathan Frankel, Prophecy and Politics: Socialism, Nationalism, and the Russian Jews, 1862-1917, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 1981), 134. 14#19This major change is what Yuri Slezkine and Andrew Sloin both term the Jewish revolution.32 Scott Ury and Inna Shtakser also argue similar points. 33 The major social change they all identify was characterized by a symbolic move away from tradition through increased education and non- traditional values, as well as a physical move from the Pale of Settlement to major cities and revolutionary hubs like Moscow and St. Petersburg, or later Petrograd and then Leningrad. ³4 In succinct terms, the Jewish revolution can be summarized as “the story of the Jewish social rise, Jewish patricide, and Jewish conversion to non-Jewishness (of whatever kind)."³5 According to both Ury and Shtakser, this revolution began amidst the political and social changes of the 1905 Revolution, in which Jewish working-class individuals experienced tremendous change to their identity as Jews. 36 More specifically, Jewish individuals, influenced by modern secularism, radical politics, increased education, and abandoned traditions, largely identified themselves with a new movement, rather than the Jewish roots they grew up with. 37 Education was a fundamental aspect of this transformation, as well as a physical migration from outlying territories to large cities and industrial hubs. Societally, the growing change in individuals' identities increased the larger Jewish community's position and, eventually, Jews 32 Sloin, The Jewish revolution in Belorussia, 2; Slezkine, The Jewish Century, 223. 33 Scott Ury, Barricades and Banners: The Revolution of 1905 and the Transformation of Warsaw Jewry, (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2012), 3-6; Inna Shtakser, The Making of Jewish revolutionaries in the Pale of Settlement: Community and Identity during the Russian Revolution and its Immediate Aftermath, 1905-07, (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2014), 6-9. 34 Slezkine, The Jewish Century, 216 35 Ibid, 254. 36 Shtakser, The Making of Jewish revolutionaries in the Pale of Settlement, 2; Ury, Barricades and Banners, 3-5. 37 Shtakser, The Making of Jewish revolutionaries, 49. 15#20came to hold higher levels of literacy, education, and government participation compared to other nationalities. 38 After 1905, the next major change in Russian political and social life came with the outbreak of the First World War and then the following two revolutions in 1917. The unrest which had almost a decade earlier forced Tsar Nicholas II, at least temporarily, to relinquish some of his power to the Duma only intensified. Continued injustices from the Imperial government, and staggering defeats in World War I were only two of the varied and multiple issues which sparked the Tsar's ultimate downfall. The Provisional Government that followed Nicholas II's abdication of the throne in March 1917 also failed and lasted only months before the Bolsheviks secured its defeat in October. The Civil War that was fought primarily between the Bolshevik Red Army and the opposing monarchist White Army was furthermore divided based on how the two groups treated Jews; much of the public associated tsarism with anti-Semitism and the White Army was similarly associated because of how many detachments “murdered and robbed tens of thousands of Jewish civilians."39 During the Civil War the Bolsheviks realized that anti-Semitism and pogroms were primary tools of the Whites and in turn officially denounced anti-Semitism. 40 Jews were never identified as an enemy group by the Red Army because while some Jews fell into the "bourgeois" category, the Bolsheviks were more interested in class distinctions than ethnic ones. 41 38 Slezkine, The Jewish Century, 222-225. 39 Slezkine, The Jewish Century, 174. 40 Low, Soviet Jewry and Soviet Policy, 30. 41 Slezkine, The Jewish Century, 173-174. 16#21Before 1917, many Jews were largely unattracted to the atheist nature of Communism, but after the Bolsheviks gained power, they became a more attractive option compared to the overtly anti-Semitic White Army. 42 Where a small number of low-class artisans and intellectuals supported the Bolsheviks pre-1917, Jews played a much larger role in the Red Army during the 43 Civil War. Additionally, many Jews were attracted to the opportunities presented by the Bolsheviks, who publicly denounced anti-Semitism, and they thus filled numerous government and Party positions in the newly formed Soviet government. 44 Lazar Kaganovich grew up and lived out his formative years during these tumultuous events in Russian and Jewish history. While Kaganovich was of a slightly younger generation than Lenin, Stalin, Trotsky, and other key revolutionary figures, he was nonetheless shaped by the revolutionary trends of the time. His own beliefs in the need to eliminate the class injustices that he witnessed in his youth impacted him dramatically. Kaganovich was also impacted by the move towards secularism that was occurring within portions of the Jewish community. Because his formative years occurred directly between the Jewish and Bolshevik revolutions, the two movements undoubtedly impacted his growth and development. Kaganovich's Childhood and Family Life Lazar Kaganovich was born on November 22, 1893, in a small village approximately 30 kilometers from Chernobyl. Located in the Kiev Province of Ukraine, the Kabany of Kaganovich's youth was a small village with about 300 households, most of which were poor 42 Low, Soviet Jewry and Soviet Policy, 28. 43 Ibid. 44 Ibid, 29. 17 17#22peasants and landless families. 45 An additional five to ten wealthy families (which Kaganovich calls "kulaks" in his memoir) and around 30 richer peasant families comprised the rest of the population. 46 As Kaganovich wrote the first sections of his memoir in the 1960s, his work clearly expresses his ideological views at the time – views he held until he died in 1991.47 Despite the ideologically charged description of the "kulaks” in his village, Kaganovich recalls his time in Kabany with clear nostalgia as he describes the landscape and population of his hometown. Located amidst numerous forests of pine, spruce, and oak trees with a large road running through it, Kabany was home to many animals, such as moose, badgers, otters, wild boars, and in lesser numbers, foxes, minks, stoats, and beavers. 48 Kaganovich recalls how peasant hunters especially sought the minks, ferrets, and ermine, as well as fish which they would eat or sell frozen. 49 Inside the village, where the trees were largely removed due to deforestation, one willow remained, as well as a river which was occasionally dry from the removal of the trees. 50 There was also a smaller forest of trees on the village outskirts which, according to Kaganovich, belonged to the kids. It was there that they would both play and host festivities, as well as pick berries, wild apples, and pears, and make birch brooms for the baths. 51 Kaganovich also describes the harsh living conditions of the poorer peasants – clay floors and small huts shared by numerous family members were common; literacy, lamps, and kerosene to light the lamps, were 45 Kaganovich, Pamiatnye zapiski, 19-20. 46 Ibid. 47 Ibid, 13. 48 Ibid, 19-20. 49 Ibid. 50 Ibid, 20. 51 Ibid. 18#2352 uncommon.2 Drunken fights due to the introduction of vodka to the village were occasionally prevalent, but overall, Kaganovich describes the village as otherwise peaceful.53 Kaganovich himself lived with his mother, father, and numerous siblings in a small one-room hut with dirt floors. He recalls the time he was finally able to purchase a kerosene lamp and thus read at night as one of his most impactful childhood experiences. 54 Kaganovich and his family were outliers in their local social and class spheres as they were the only Jewish family to live outside of Kabany's smaller Jewish colony that was located on the western outskirts of the village. 55 According to Kaganovich, they lived “in the thick of the peasant poor population.”56 Despite having family and friends in the colony, where the majority of the population worked as artisans, Kaganovich and his family resided in the larger village with the predominantly poor peasant population.57 The reason for his family's relatively unusual location compared to the other Jewish families was less so because of ideological or religious reasons but due to his father's and grandfather's work history.58 Specifically, Kaganovich's grandfather never received the land he was promised during what Kaganovich calls "the resettlement.”59 Earlier when describing his village, Kaganovich notes that all peasants in his village and surrounding areas were state-owned and faced numerous hardships after the end of 52 Ibid, 22. 53 Ibid, 23. 54 Rees, Iron Lazar, 4. 55 Kaganovich, Pamiatnye zapiski, 24. 56 Ibid. 57 Ibid. 58 Ibid. 59 Ibid. 19#24serfdom in 1861.00 He describes how the peasants received little to no land and also had to make payments to the government for what they did receive. 61 While he never explicitly states that his grandfather was a state-owned peasant, based on the information he provides we can safely assume that his grandfather was one such peasant; it was this economic situation Kaganovich is referencing when he mentions the resettlement. Additionally, when Kaganovich's father was 13 years old, he was sent by his grandfather to work for loggers and farmers to financially aid the family. Kaganovich's mother was born in Chernobyl to a family of copper workers and when she married Kaganovich's father, they moved into a stepka, a small hut meant for storing vegetables. 62 Kaganovich's father was injured while at work when Kaganovich and his five siblings were young. Finances were particularly hard and while the family eventually made enough money to move to a larger hut made of wooden planks, they never moved further to the Jewish colony on the other side of the village. 63 It was the combination of these economic hardships and living conditions that caused Kaganovich's family to settle outside the Jewish colony. However, while Kaganovich did not live in the Jewish colony, he and his family had connections who did live there, and they often visited each other.6 On one hand, Kaganovich's description of the village seems wistful and highly nostalgic as he remembers the landscape and natural features. On the other hand, however, his words are tinted with frustration and outright contempt for the richer peasants and those he terms 'kulaks' 64 60 Ibid,21. 61 Ibid. 62 Ibid, 24. 63 Rees, Iron Lazar, 3. 64 Kaganovich, Pamiatnye zapiski, 25-26. 20 20#25who he describes as having enslaved the poorer peasants because of the changing land laws that 66 they abused.65 Kaganovich notes that within the smaller Jewish colony there was also a noticeable presence of class differences and inequality caused by the wealthier families. In the Jewish colony, he records that of the twenty families there were two wealthier ones who were able to engage in trade and agriculture. Beyond that, there were three to four normal peasant families, and the rest were poor artisans, who made crafts and worked serving the peasants.67 It was to these poor families within the Jewish colony that Kaganovich and his family were most closely associated. He notes how he and his family “took their hardships to heart, as they took ours. 9568 He also mentions his mother's dislike of the rich Jewish neighbors who “cheated and squeezed the juices of the Jewish poor." .”69 Despite these hardships, Kaganovich remained optimistic, a trait his mother and father encouraged he and his brothers have, as well as dedication to hard work and labor.70 Overall, Kaganovich makes it clear that there was a constant and continuous struggle between the social classes, both inside and outside of the Jewish colony. As a result, children predominantly associated with similar classes, rather than nationalities.71 Kaganovich's childhood and youth show many similarities to other Jewish youths of the time who joined the Jewish revolution. One important aspect of the Jewish revolution was the 65 Ibid, 21-22. 66 Ibid, 26. 67 Ibid. 68 Ibid, 25. 69 Ibid, 33. 70 Ibid. 71 Ibid, 46. 21#2672 desire for literacy and a modern secular education, with an emphasis on learning Russian. 2 Other important traits were a move away from the rural home towards industrial cities and urban jobs, and a more metaphorical move away from traditional beliefs and orthodox behavior towards revolutionary belief and activities.73 While Kaganovich was not raised in an extremely devout religious family, his experiences nevertheless align with the Jewish revolutionary trajectory in an interesting way which places him in a unique position as a young Jewish man living amidst both the Bolshevik and Jewish revolutions. Education Education is one of the ways that Kaganovich's life overlaps most significantly with others within the Jewish revolution. In the Jewish Century Slezkine argues "the Russian Revolution was a combination of popular uprisings, religious crusades, ethnic wars, colonial conquests, and clashing coalitions. One part of the mix was the Jewish revolution against 9974 Jewishness." Inseparable from the Jewish revolution against Jewishness was Jewish integration into Russian high culture and new educational and intellectual pursuits. Or in other words, "an eager conversion to the Pushkin faith," as Slezkine describes. 75 Receiving a modern secular education and learning the Russian language were vital if one wanted to rebel against Jewishness because "speaking was the key to reading; reading was the key to everything else."76 that "the Jewish tradition of emancipation through reading had been extended to the This meant 72 Shtakser, The Making of Jewish revolutionaries, 41-43. 73 Slezkine, The Jewish Century, 206. 74 Ibid, 167. 75 Ibid, 127. 76 Ibid, 129. 22#27emancipation from the Jewish tradition."77 For many Jewish youths, however, obtaining quality education was exceedingly difficult due to legal and financial limitations. Kaganovich's early education was fraught with such difficulties. Originally, he was supposed to study at the heder in the local synagogue, but according to his parents it was primitive, and they did not want him to study there. 78 To them, the school was primitive because it lacked Russian classes and did not teach general education topics.79 Russian classes were particularly important to Kaganovich because the language of his village was Ukrainian, but like many other youths in the Pale he wished to speak Russian. According to Kaganovich's self- written personal file from the 1920s, he spoke Russian, Ukrainian, and had "a weak command of Yiddish."80 While it is unclear if Kaganovich spoke Ukrainian or Yiddish at home, his deep desire to learn Russian is evident in his memoir.81 On the school system of his village, Kaganovich notes that "the two-class school that existed in the village did not accept the children of Jewish non-landowners although later I studied there unofficially."82 Before this, Kaganovich's parents and those of some other Jewish 77 Ibid, 130. 78 Kaganovich provides very little information about the synagogue and never mentions any instances where he or his family attended services there. Additionally, he offers no indication of ever observing any Jewish traditions or customs. 79 Kaganovich, Pamiatnye zapiski, 37. 80 Rees, Iron Lazar, 3. 81 The question of what language Kaganovich grew up speaking is particularly confusing because according to the file he wrote in the 1920s, he spoke Ukrainian but only had a weak command of Yiddish. This would make sense considering he grew up outside of the Jewish colony in Kabany and would be able to communicate with his neighbors more easily in Ukrainian than Yiddish. However, Terry Martin describes him as having "a weak command of Ukrainian" in 1925, and claims Kaganovich told a group of Ukrainian representatives he promised to learn the language in order to give his next speech in Ukrainian, which he failed to do in 1925. There is no clear answer to this discrepancy. (Terry Martin, The Affirmative Action Empire: Nations and Nationalism in the Soviet Union, 1923-1939, (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2011), 85.) 82 Kaganovich, Pamiatnye zapiski, 37. 23#28boys from the colony hired a tutor from Chernobyl to work with the kids on topics not covered by the heder. 83 The anecdote about Kaganovich's tutor is a fascinating testament to life in his village and the availability of education in his region of the Pale. The tutor was, in Kaganovich's words, a paralyzed cripple from Chernobyl who had lost the use of both his legs.84 Kaganovich and the other kids created a cart and sled for him because the classes would take place in alternating houses depending on the day. Kaganovich notes how "we the children had to take 985 care of him, bring him food, water, and transport him ... We loved him very much." In addition to his physical attributes Kaganovich describes his brilliant understanding of Russian language and literature two favorite topics for Kaganovich. He also adds that the tutor "was not a religious fanatic, so he wittily presented the Bible to us, ridiculing some of its absurdities and 986 emphasizing such prophets as Amos." In an especially bleak passage, Kaganovich recounts how this "secular general education heder," which was at the time illegal, was broken up by an inspector.87 The tutor was dragged outside and beaten, and their educational tools were destroyed. Going forward, Kaganovich and his father had to fight for another local school to allow him to attend. Some other children went back to the synagogue, but Kaganovich and his family decided that was not an option for him. He was first turned away from the other school, run by some of the rich Jewish members of the colony, because of his poor status. After numerous 83 Ibid. 84 Ibid. 85 Ibid. 86 Ibid. 87 Ibid, 37-38. 24#29attempts to gain entry, he was accepted unofficially.88 Unfortunately, Kaganovich's classroom education ended when he was thirteen and he transitioned to being a blacksmith's apprentice for .89 Nevertheless, his memoirs exhibit his strong desire for a better education and financial reasons. his drive towards self-education when other avenues of schooling failed.⁹0 Despite receiving only a few years of official education, Kaganovich was devoted to learning and self-study. He was particularly fond of Russian literature, and would occasionally read stories, poems, and "Nekrasov, Gogol, Tolstoy, and more” to others."1 Additionally, he mentions how he "independently read the available individual works of Pushkin, Lermontov, Nekrasov, L. Tolstoy, and Turgenev” and notes that "of all the general subjects, I was still most interested in history - Russian and universal."92 The traits of self-education, dedication to learning Russian, and studying Russian literature were necessary aspects of the "conversion to the Pushkin faith" that Slezkine describes.93 Becoming a Bolshevik In addition to transitioning from traditional beliefs to new ideologies, young revolutionaries also moved to cities, formed self-education groups, and worked in certain jobs; the mental transition came with a clear lifestyle change. Situations varied from person to person but there was a definitive trend of leaving the family home, taking up urban work in factories and workshops, joining unions, learning under a mentor, and studying and organizing revolutionary 88 Ibid, 39. 89 Rees, Iron Lazar, 4. 90 Kaganovich, Pamiatnye zapiski, 44, 51. 91 Ibid, 7. 92 Ibid, 40. 93 Slezkine, The Jewish Century, 127. 25#30activity in secret cells and underground groups. 94 Kaganovich's life as a young revolutionary displayed many of these traits, starting in 1907 when he was fourteen and moved to Kiev to work alongside his brother after his family could not afford to continue his education.95 Ury in particular highlights the struggles of Jews moving to urban cities for the first time. Kaganovich's transition to Kiev did not go smoothly, and his time in Kiev mirrors some of the realities Ury discusses, particularly the material struggles of Jewish youths and their turn to 96 revolutionary work in order to find community.” He recalls the stress of trying, and often 97 failing, to find regular work in Kiev." He also mentions surviving only on the most limited provisions and reflects on the poor living conditions he endured while acclimating to the city and trying to find work. When he did find work, Kaganovich took up jobs in factories and workshops. At fourteen he worked as a shoemaker and continued on to work in the leather 98 industry. During this time, Kaganovich's earlier sentiments of animosity towards the upper classes continued to intensify; he recalls watching the rich and well-dressed people who would pass him in the streets and feeling "imbued with a keen sense of class hatred for these parasites, bloodsuckers, and, at the time a deep sense of solidarity, love, and respect for my brothers in class, in need, suffering the same as myself."99 It was at this time that his ideological commitment to Bolshevism grew from his younger ideas and inclinations into a serious devotion. 94 Ury, Barricades and Banners, 96-97. 95 Rees, Iron Lazar, 4-5 96 Ury, Barricades and Banners, 45-46; 54-56. 97 Kaganovich, Pamiatnye zapiski, 58-59. 98 Rees, Iron Lazar, 5. 99 Kaganovich, Pamiatnye zapiski, 61-62. 26#31Additionally, this sense of class injustice was the avenue through which Kaganovich found community while in Kiev. He declares, “I have clearly, irrevocably decided that the only real way for me is the physical labor of the proletarian worker, who sells his labor force but fights "100 with the capitalist exploiter." 101 In 1911, Kaganovich joined the Bolshevik Party." He declares with great pride, “I entered the Great University of the Revolution, the university of the great Party - the University of Lenin!"102 Kaganovich's older brother Mikhail entered the Party earlier 103 in 1905, and this likely made an impact on Kaganovich's decision to join as well." As Rees notes, there is a slight discrepancy in whether or not Kaganovich joined the Bolsheviks officially in 1911 or 1912. Regardless, this period was his introduction to Bolshevik life and after joining the Party and 'the Great university of revolution,' Kaganovich quickly became successful as a revolutionary. 104 He was regularly engaged in the common revolutionary activities of organizing groups, being an agitator, and setting up secret meetings. After marrying his wife Maria Privorotskaya in 1912, also a strong Bolshevik and Party member since 1909 when she was only fifteen, the couple used their apartment in Kiev as a meeting place for underground activity. They also produced pamphlets and revolutionary posters there. 105 While Kaganovich's wife was also Jewish by birth, he never clarifies whether their marriage was strictly legal or also religious, but it is clear that they regularly completed revolutionary work together." 106 100 Ibid, 59. 101 Rees, Iron Lazar, 5. 102 Kaganovich, Pamiatnye zapiski, 76. 103 Ibid, 29. 104 Rees, Iron Lazar, 5. 105 Ibid. 106 Ibid. 27#32Kaganovich developed his commitment to Bolshevism in Kiev, but his time there was not without its drawbacks. In one especially mournful passage, Kaganovich reflects on having to give up on his dreams of continuing his education due to his economic situation. 107 This unfortunate reality was faced by many youths at the time, especially those from the Pale who had limited access to education. Like other revolutionary youths, Kaganovich attempted to overcome this struggle through self-education. Kaganovich's journey with self-education began when he was still living in Kabany, but in Kiev he progressed to organizing educational circles, the first of which he started for workers when he was just 16 years old. 108 Kaganovich also reflects on his favorite author, Gorky, and recalls reading his works to other workers he lived near. 109 Kaganovich's revolutionary work from 1913-1914 of producing pamphlets, hosting secret meetings, and engaging in agitation work landed him in slight trouble with the authorities. In early 1914, a group of Kiev Bolsheviks were sent into exile. Kaganovich was not one of them, but his apartment was placed under police surveillance, and he was forced to move to continue 110 his revolutionary activities." Months later, in August 1914, Russia joined World War I. Kaganovich was able to avoid army involvement until 1917, when he was conscripted. 111 Before then, Kaganovich was briefly arrested, along with other leaders of the Kiev Party committee, and sent back to Kabany. In 1916, Kaganovich and his wife moved a few times, first to Ekaterinoslav where Kaganovich worked in a shoe factory and was later fired for organizing a strike, then next to Yuzovka where he again took up work in a shoe factory. Here, Kaganovich also worked as 107 Ibid, 51. 108 Rees, Iron Lazar, 5. 109 Kaganovich, Pamiatnye zapiski, 83-84. 110 Rees, 7. 111 Ibid, 9. 28#33the leader of the local Bolshevik organization where he formed an illegal bootmakers union and led numerous successful strikes. 112 Still in Yuzovka, Kaganovich spoke at his first mass meeting in March 1917, and he discovered a talent for public speaking that would carry on throughout his life. 113 He also joined the Yuzovka unified committee of the Russian Social Democratic Labor Party (RSDLP) at this point. Later in 1917, Kaganovich returned to Kiev, but was conscripted into the Army and shortly transferred to Saratov. Specifically, Kaganovich served in the 7th company of the 42nd Infantry Regiment in Saratov. 114 While in the Army, Kaganovich was elected chairman of the newly established Military Organization of the Saratov RSDLP. 115 This role was especially impactful on Kaganovich's development because it allowed him to attend the All- Russian Conference of Bolshevik military Party organizations which was occurring in Petrograd; this trip made a major impact on Kaganovich, filling him with conflicting emotions. He recalls the beauty of the city, noting that "bourgeois aesthetes lie when they portray us, workers, soldiers, and peasants, as simpletons, not feeling and not interested in beauty. On the contrary, we received, especially a city like Petrograd, enthusiastically ... However, in 1917 our hearts, souls, and brains were mainly filled with indignation, not admiration, not with the shapes of palaces, but their class content. "116 Additionally, Kaganovich emphatically notes, “We knew that these palaces were built on the bones and tears of the people, that even though the tsars and courtiers were overthrown, even today ... those in power, who continue to exploit and oppress 112 Ibid, 8. 113 Ibid, 9. 114 Ibid. 115 Ibid. 116 Kaganovich, Pamiatnye zapiski, 107-108. 29#34the people, continue to live in these palaces." 117 Kaganovich expresses his deep abhorrence for the wealth of the upper classes and their disregard for the workers and peasants. His trip to Petrograd placed him in the important role of attending the All-Russian Conference of Bolshevik military Party organizations, but it was also a major step in further lighting his revolutionary sentiments. "120 After Kaganovich's 1917 June trip, he attempted to return to Saratov but was arrested on claims that he had illegally traveled to Petrograd. When he was arrested, he was sent to the front along with other Bolshevik activists; the group never made it however, as they were freed by the Polese committee of the Bolshevik Party at Gomel' station. 118 Kaganovich remained in this region during the October Revolution, and he played a key role in securing Bolshevik support in the key cities of Gomel' and Mogilev. 119 Rees notes that Minsk and the western region of Belarus were "no backwater, but a major stronghold of Bolshevik support.” Some of the major roles Kaganovich held around the October Revolution were serving as a member of the Yuzovka unified committee of the Russian Social Democratic Labor Party (RSDLP) in 1917, presiding over the third congress of soviets in the Mogiliev province, serving as a member of the All- Russian Bureau of Military Organizations of the Bolsheviks, through which he was a chairman of a lobbying committee sent to Petrograd, and serving as the deputy to the Constituent Assembly on the Bolshevik list in Petrograd in early 1918." 121 117 Ibid, 108. 118 Rees, Iron Lazar, 11. 119 Ibid, 12-13. 120 Ibid, 13. 121 Ibid, 13-14. 30 30#35These roles were all important in Kaganovich's rise through the Bolshevik Party. They are also representative of the fact that at this point, Kaganovich was fully entrenched in the Party life as he continued to serve in various chairman roles and often attended important conferences and congresses. The years between 1914 and 1917 were a springboard for Kaganovich's rise in power. Kaganovich gained acclaim, connections, and experience during these years. His work would also gain him the attention of Lenin, and then Stalin, securing his position as a key figure in Soviet politics in the years to come. After 1917 is when Kaganovich broke from the Jewish revolution because of his dedication to Bolshevism. Kaganovich's involvement in the Soviet apparatus and membership in the Bolshevik Party did not separate Kaganovich from other Jewish revolutionaries because of his involvement alone, but rather the ideological dedication his involvement signified. Sloin notes that many Jews joined the Bolshevik Party for increased access to privileges, jobs, and material goods." He argues that "the significant presence of Jewish actors within the apparatus 122 "123 of Soviet power by no means meant uniform support for the regime." However, unlike the Jews who joined the Party apparatus for benefits or other reasons, Kaganovich was ideologically devoted to the cause, as is shown by his frequent and passionate declarations of class consciousness. This is the primary factor which separates Kaganovich from the rest of the Jewish revolution and pushes him further in Party life during the Civil War. Because of this break, "Kaganovich emerged from the Civil War as one of the new elites of proletarian, revolutionary 122 Sloin, The Jewish revolution in Belorussia, 27. 123 Ibid. 31#36administrators who were to have a decisive influence in shaping the political development of the state in the coming era.' Civil War 124 Kaganovich's Civil War involvement set the stage for his later rapid advancement in the Soviet Union. After 1917, Kaganovich continued to participate in official Party meetings, such as the 1918 Constituent Assembly where he was elected to serve as a deputy on the Bolshevik list, and the 1918 III All-Russian Congress of Deputies where he was a delegate." Additionally, 125 during the Civil War, Kaganovich was influential in "Nizhniy Novgorod, Voronezh, and 126 Tashkent” where he worked as an agitator during the Civil War. In 1918, Kaganovich oversaw the Red Terror in Nizhniy Novgorod, a role that was “a formative stage in his career."127 He was also a main proponent of militarizing the Party, and he was an articulate supporter of 128 merging the Bolshevik Party and the Soviet state apparatus. Ultimately, Kaganovich's work as an agitator and Party member was successful to the point that it was recognized by the Central Committee; in 1920, the Central Committee sent Kaganovich to Turkestan to help aid their goal of bringing the Civil War to an end by securing victory in the periphery territories. 129 Kaganovich played a vital role in securing victory in Turkestan during the Civil War. 130 124 Rees, Iron lazar, 41. 125 Ibid, 14. 126 Ibid, 42. 127 Ibid, 38. 128 Ibid. 129 Ibid, 33. 130 Ibid, 38. 32#37Kaganovich also gained the attention of Stalin during the later years of the Civil War, and he had a few interactions with Lenin as well.¹ 131 By 1922, Kaganovich's career reached a new height when under Lenin's approval, he was sent to work in the Secretariat which was a part of "the Leninist group's maneuvers to maintain control over the Party in opposition to Trotsky and his supporters." "132 Here, Kaganovich became the head of the Secretariat's Organization and Instruction Department. When he brought up some insecurities about accepting the position, Stalin personally reassured him that others had vouched for his work, and he was right for the position. 133 The Civil War period served as the culmination of Kaganovich's transition through the Jewish revolution and also his break from it. He had gained an education in Russian, however limited, and turned to self-education to continue his studies. He also moved away from his small village in Kabany to Kiev and Minsk, and eventually visited St Petersburg and Moscow, where he settled after the Civil War. These were necessary components of the Jewish revolution that Kaganovich participated in. Additionally, he rose steadily through the ranks of the Bolshevik Party from printing leaflets and organizing underground meetings in Kiev in the early 1910's, to accepting a major government position in Moscow in 1922 with both Lenin and Stalin's approval. Kaganovich was a full Bolshevik and lifelong Leninist and by the end of the Civil War he was in a major government role. 131 Ibid, 39. 132 Ibid. 133 Ibid. 33 33#38Kaganovich on the Jewish Issues Another major separation between Kaganovich and other Jewish revolutionaries is his apparent lack of interest in Jewish issues. Besides a brief mention of the Beilis case of 1911, which occurred while he was still in Kiev, Kaganovich refers very little to his personal ethnic background or issues related to it. 134 Kaganovich and his brothers also refused to join the Bund early on, and instead opted for the Bolshevik Party. 135 Zionism is one issue he does mention, but only briefly and negatively. Kaganovich describes the affinity he held in his youth for the prophet Amos, who he saw as a defender of the poor and an advocate of personally tackling oppressors; in 1912, he mentions using Amos in a Bolshevik context when speaking out against Zionists saying Amos fought against rich oppressors like the Zionists in Kiev, especially "millionaires Brodsky and Ginzburg.' "136 In another instance, he proudly boasts on how he "bullied" Zionists in his youth. 137 His claims about Zionism are supported by his later interactions with the Zionist movement, which he never supported, and even went on to call racist, imperialist, and war-like. 138 In fact, rather than address Jewish issues, Kaganovich's memoir is filled with overt expressions of his class consciousness and sense of connection with other poor workers. His memoirs, if completely genuine, show evidence that these sentiments began early in his childhood in the village of his youth, where he was surrounded primarily by other poor families 134 Kaganovich, Pamiatnye zapiski, 85-86. 135 Rees, Iron Lazar, 6. 136 Kaganovich, Pamiatnye zapiski, 41. 137 Chuev, Tak govoril Kaganovich, 190. 138 Kaganovich, Pamiatnye zapiski, 47. 34#39of various ethnic backgrounds. He writes, "It is no exaggeration to say that the socio-class environment with which my family was organically connected had a decisive influence on the formation of my personality, on filling my soul and consciousness with feelings of solidarity, class kinship with the poor, indignation at injustice, oppression at the emergence of revolutionary and effective activity.”139 Also unlike in the Jewish revolution Slezkine describes, Kaganovich never expresses any animosity towards his parents. While he is clear in his desire to move away from home, it is not expressed as an escape from his mother or father but rather a journey towards something, namely financial opportunities, his brother who was also in Kiev, and the dream of continuing his education. Furthermore, Kaganovich actually reflects fondly on his parents and attributes his resilience and work ethic to their influence. He notes, “we, the children, grew up and became modern people - revolutionaries - Bolsheviks, but we did not oppose ourselves to our father and mother but took all the best from them. We loved, and most importantly, respected and still respect our parents." "140 This shows little resemblance to Slezkine's descriptions of the Jewish 141 revolution as a "violent family romance." In a literal sense, Kaganovich does not fit this particular aspect. In a metaphorical sense however, his transition to Bolshevism and his shunning of his Jewish background in favor for a secular lifestyle are certainly symbolic of patricide against the traditional Jewish community. Conclusion In many ways the years leading up to 1917 were Kaganovich's formative years; they 139 Ibid, 31-32. 140 Ibid, 34. 141 Slezkine, The Jewish Century, 220, 254. 55 35#40placed him in the middle of the larger decline of the Russian Empire and resulting Bolshevik Revolution as well as amidst the Jewish revolution that was so deeply intertwined with the larger movements occurring at the time. Kaganovich thus emerges as an individual who both interacted with and to a certain extent participated in the Jewish revolution in the first half of the twentieth century. However, while Kaganovich's life shows many similarities to the lives of other Jewish revolutionaries, his particular dedication to Bolshevism, which in part resulted from his specific childhood conditions, is what largely separates him from other participants in the Jewish revolution. Kaganovich experienced and participated in many facets of the Jewish revolution of the 1905-1917 era, but unlike many other Jewish revolutionaries, his unwavering faith in Bolshevism drove him further than his Jewish contemporaries and would eventually place him in an extremely powerful position as Stalin's primary deputy for many years. Additionally, while many Jewish revolutionaries fought for change within the Jewish community, Kaganovich separated himself from this community as a result of his Bolshevik faith. He almost never discusses solidarity with the Jewish community, but regularly cites examples of his camaraderie with fellow workers, regardless of their ethnicities. Kaganovich is therefore a unique example of the Jewish revolution because of the common experiences in his youth that he shared with other young Jewish revolutionaries but also because of the ways he diverged from the common path. The decades following his formative years, namely the 1920s and 1930s, are where Kaganovich was the most influential in Soviet policy formation and enforcement. They are also the years when his turn away from the Jewish community becomes the most apparent. 36#41CHAPTER II Starting with the creation of the Soviet Union and running until the Soviet Union's involvement in World War II, this second chapter covers an important era of growth and revival for many Jews within the Soviet Union. During this era of approximately a decade and a half, the Jewish revolution, as noted by Slezkine, did not die out but evolved to fit the growing political, cultural, artistic, and educational trends of the day. Where the Jewish revolution from 1905 and 1917 was based on leaving behind Jewish roots and transitioning to a secular lifestyle amidst modern realities, the Jewish revolution which continued into the 1920s and 1930s primarily involved the assimilation of Jews into Soviet life, politics, and culture. While Kaganovich's success in Soviet politics at first seems like a strong example of Slezkine's assimilation argument, Kaganovich actually rose far above the model Slezkine presents of being, "consistently and by a substantial margin, the most literate group in the Soviet Union” and making incredibly high portions of white-collar workers. 142 Kaganovich was not only educated and engaged in "white collar work," but he was a leading member of the government. Kaganovich, through becoming a Bolshevik in 1911 and rising quickly through the ranks of Party power, left behind the Jewish revolution. Thus, the question is now about Kaganovich's experience in Party life as a Jewish Bolshevik. Specifically, what became of Kaganovich's Jewishness when he achieved political power? Through this question I seek to highlight another aspect of the main context of the overall 142 Slezkine, The Jewish Century, 222, 247. 37#42Jewish experience in the Soviet Union, namely, how Soviet policies treated the Jewish question and how Kaganovich maneuvered within Soviet politics. I will ultimately show that Kaganovich did not only leave behind the Jewish revolution, but his Jewishness as well. Kaganovich paid little attention to Jewish policies and removed himself from the Soviet Jewish community in favor of fully joining Stalin's inner circle. Background The 1920s in the Soviet Union saw a wide array of events and changes which would eventually result in the rise of Stalinism and the country's transition from a small revolutionary state to what would become one of the world's largest superpowers. After the excitement and activity of the revolutionary and Civil War years, the Bolshevik Party underwent vast changes as it transitioned from the previously small underground movement to the dominant governing political force. 143 The new regime was faced with unavoidable realities in post-Civil War Russia that ranged from the necessity of economic and industrial growth and military reorganization to the challenges of governing numerous, semi- independent national groups. In other words, the 1920s formed a period of major change as the Bolsheviks first formed the Soviet Union and then faced the realities of governing it. The question of nationalities was especially challenging because the multiethnic composition of the former Russian Empire meant that when the Bolsheviks came to power in 1917, they did not inherit a unified and coherent country, but a disjointed and loosely connected group of numerous ethnic and national minorities with different languages, cultures, territories, and aspirations. As Terry Martin notes, when the Bolsheviks seized power in October 1917, 143 Geoffrey Hosking, The First Socialist Society: A History of the Soviet Union from Within, (Cambridge, M.A.: Harvard University Press, 1990), 85. 38#43"they did not possess a coherent nationalities policy." "144 Lenin sought to give nations the option between full independence from Soviet Russia or become a constituent part of it, but like Hosking describes, in reality most nations wanted a mixture of both with a status similar to that of an autonomous group within a multinational federal state." 145 To attempt to resolve this issue the Bolsheviks made a few declarations during their first years in power. The first was the Declaration of the Rights of the Peoples of Russia in 1917, which recognized the autonomy and sovereignty of national groups, allowing them the freedom to form an independent state, if they desired. 146 The declaration furthermore abolished all national privileges from the earlier empire. 147 Second was the 1918 Declaration of the Rights of the Toiling and Exploited People which put the government's aspirations of being a federation of national republics into writing. 148 Additionally, Lenin also formed the People's Commissariat of Nationality Affairs that served as a mediator between national conflicts and broadly advised non- Russians on how Bolshevism would impact them. 149 These declarations occurred during immense political upheaval and the Civil War, making them nearly impossible to implement. The growth of nationalism across the territories of the former Russian Empire was a spark for the development of the Soviet nationalities policy that was created from 1919-1923. During this period, Stalin was "the Bolsheviks' acknowledged 'master of the nationalities question"" because of his Georgian roots and he therefore served as the Commissar of Nationalities from 144 Martin, The Affirmative Action Empire, 2. 145 Hosking, The First Socialist Society: A History of the Soviet Union from Within, 98. 146 Ibid. 147 Ibid. 148 Ibid. 149 Ibid, 99. 39#44150 1917-1924. Stalin and Lenin worked together to establish an official statement on the Bolshevik view towards nationalities, and despite a few disagreements, the Twelfth Party Congress passed an official policy in the form of resolutions in April 1923, with a special Central Committee conference on nationalities set to occur in June. 151 Ultimately, the resolutions declared the state's commitment to fully supporting nationalities, in the form of language, territory, and culture, to the extent that they did not create a conflict with Communism or the central state. The resolutions changed little from the previous unofficial policy beyond officially stating the government had no intentions of abolishing national groups and would instead offer Ideologically, this decision was based on the concept that nationalism was an unavoidable product of both capitalism and early socialism. Much like capitalism was a them support. 152 necessary precursor to socialism, nationalism was an inevitable early stage that the world must go through before international socialism could be realized. It was "a masking ideology" through which legitimate class concerns could be vocalized in the form of an "above class national 99153 movement. Thus, although the concept of fully supporting nationalist movements seems inconsistent with both socialist ideology and Soviet central state aspirations, the Bolsheviks were able to delineate a theoretical middle ground. While the general issue of nationalism was in theory settled with the 1923 resolutions, the issue of Jewish nationalism remained – particularly, whether Jews constituted a nation or not. In summary, Stalin, under the tutelage of Lenin, did not originally define the Jews as a nation 150 Ibid. 151 Ibid, 98. 152 Ibid. 153 Ibid, 97. 40 40#45because he did not see them as having a national language or a common territory. Stalin wrote on this in 1913, but with the rise of the Bolshevik Revolution and the realities of Soviet policy formation, Lenin and Stalin changed to consider them as a non-territorial nationality. 154 The basis for Lenin's and Stalin's philosophies on the national status of Jews was linked to Marx's original understanding of the Jews as a cultural-religious group rather than a nationality. 155 In "Marxism and Jewish Nationalism,” Nira Yuval-Davis notes that the question of Jewish nationality actually came after Marx's time, and the question for Marx and his contemporaries was not if the Jews were entitled to national self-determination territorially, but if Jews, as individuals, were entitled to political emancipation. 156 Marx separated the civil sphere from the political sphere in the Jewish case and determined that “the social base of Judaism is ... money and commerce," meaning true emancipation would only come when society was free from "the Jewish spirit."157 In other words, to Marx, "the social emancipation of the Jews [was] the emancipation of society from Judaism.”158 While Lenin and Stalin's understandings of Jewish nationality were influenced by Marx's, there are fundamental differences. Most importantly, Jewish nationality had become a debated question where it was not before. Lenin, in general, saw nationalities as a distraction from the larger proletarian struggle, and thus cared little for national struggles or the concept of national cultural autonomy. 159 154 Zvi Gitelman, Assimiliation, Acculturation, and National Consciousness Among Soviet Jews, (New York: Institute for Jewish Policy Planning and Research of the Synagogue Council of America, 1973), 11. 155 Nira Yuval-Davis, "Marxism and Jewish Nationalism," History Workshop 24 (Autumn 1987): 100. 156 Yuval-Davis, "Marxism and Jewish Nationalism," 85. 157 Ibid, 86. 158 Ibid. 159 Ibid, 98-99. 41#46To Lenin, Jewish nationalism was a Bundist and Zionist myth and the only answer to the 160 He extended this view to Jewish question would be eliminating the Jewish status as ‘other." the other non-Russian nationalities as well, and thus he and Stalin originally saw assimilation as the answer to the issue of nationalities. Due to the changing status of the Soviet state through the Civil War and following years, Stalin realized the need for a new nationalities policy because, as he points out in "The National Question and Leninism," from 1929, "nations and national languages possess an extraordinary stability and tremendous power of resistance to the policy of assimilation."161 Stalin explicitly clarified this ideological shift by stating in the same publication that "the policy of assimilation is unreservedly excluded from the arsenal of Marxism-Leninism, as an anti-popular policy, a fatal policy."162 While Lenin and Stalin would move past assimilation to the new policy of limited national encouragement during the aforementioned 1923 XII Party Congress, unlike other nationalities, Jews, who lacked a national homeland, were still expected to assimilate. The concept of assimilation was thus the defining trait of Soviet policy towards the Jews in the 1920s and into the early 1930s. As early as 1918 the government established two new organizations for encouraging Jewish assimilation. These were the Commissariat for Jewish National Affairs within the larger Commissariat for Nationalities (Evkom) and the Jewish Sections of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (Evsektsiia). 163 These two groups worked towards "the destruction of the old order, the Bolshevization of the Jewish proletariat, and the reconstruction of Jewish national life ... and 160 Ibid, 100. 161 Stalin, Joseph, "The National Question and Leninism," (New York: International Publishers, 1929), 15. 162 Ibid. 163 Gitelman, Assimiliation, Acculturation, and National Consciousness Among Soviet Jews, 11. 42#47the modernization of the Soviet Jewish population."164 The groups were originally created at the start of the Civil War and before Stalin's official nationalities policy for the purpose of bringing Jews into the Bolshevik Party. 165 However, they soon became an important tool in the implementation of Stalin's assimilation policy when it was formed in the early 1920s. Despite being government promoted groups that worked towards secularizing Judaism, they "also provided many Soviet Jews with their first administrative experience and actively "166 promoted Jewish political participation." The Evsektsiia in particular had a strong commitment "to the economic rehabilitation and reconstruction of the Soviet Jewish population."167 While there were some positive effects that these groups had on the Jewish community, they were largely unpopular because of the change they were created to produce: specifically, redefining "Jewish identity and national consciousness in such a way as to provide Soviet Jews with the opportunity simultaneously to achieve political-economic-social integration into the rest of Soviet society, while maintaining and developing in new ways their national identity and consciousness."168 Jews were essentially expected to accept the national identity the Soviet government created for them. This artificial nationality was a mixture of Yiddish culture with Bolshevik and Communist messaging. Overall, it was highly unpopular because many Jews wanted to achieve "national, as well as political, integration into the Russian-dominated Soviet European 164 Zvi Gitelman, Jewish Nationality and Soviet Politics: The Jewish Sections of the CPSU, 1917-1930, (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1972), 491. 165 Sloin, The Jewish revolution in Belorussia, 30. 166 Gitelman, Jewish Nationality and Soviet Politics, 486-487. 167 Ibid, 486-487. 168 Gitelman, Assimiliation, Acculturation, and National Consciousness, 16. 43#48community."169 Gitelman, like Slezkine, notes that the adoption of Russian culture was incredibly popular among Jews because it dramatically increased economic opportunities and the chance for social mobility. .170 Therefore the efforts of the Evkom and the Evsektsiia overall failed because their primary tactic was to reach the Yiddish-speaking section within the Soviet-Jewish population by providing information and propaganda on Bolshevism in Yiddish. But as most Jews were far more interested in integrating fully into the Russian- speaking community and Russian culture, the groups, and the state's larger attempt to redefine nationality for Jews, both failed. 171 The government's inability to connect with the Yiddish-speaking Jewish community and impose a redefined national identity is a major aspect of the assimilation theme of the 1920's relationship between the Soviet government and the Soviet Jewish community. The Jewish- focused policies of the 1920s were also characteristic of the government's broader "socialist in content, national in form” approach to all nationalities. 172 Due to their unpopularity and Stalin's changing priorities, both the Evkom and the Evsektsiia would be gone by 1930. At that point, Jews were much more integrated in Soviet society than they were in previous years, just not necessarily in the way Stalin had intended. Kaganovich in Soviet Politics The assimilation policies promoted by Stalin were not relevant to Kaganovich because at that time, he was already fully integrated into not only the Soviet system, but Stalin's closest allies as well. By the end of the 1920s Kaganovich would move beyond just being a trusted ally 169 Ibid. 170 Ibid, 13. 171 Ibid, 14. 172 Ibid, 12. 44#49of Stalin to becoming a full member of Stalin's inner circle and then Stalin's top Deputy from 1930-1935. Kaganovich's full integration into Soviet life is shown in multiple ways, but most clearly through his swift rise in Party status, his close relationship with Stalin, and his separation from the Jewish community almost entirely. Kaganovich's integration began when he joined the Bolshevik Party in 1911. By 1922, his status had significantly increased when he was promoted to the head of the Secretariat's Organization and Instruction Department. At this time, Kaganovich was also selected as a candidate member of the Central Committee. This meant that by 1923 when the Party was deciding its direction on nationalities policy at the XII Party Congress, Kaganovich was in the position of impacting nationalities policy rather than having it forced upon him. At this time Kaganovich was also growing closer to many elite Party members, and he was especially devoted to Stalin. He notes in his memoir: I was lucky enough in 1923 to work in close proximity to the Central Committee of our Party and again and again to learn great idealism, principles in the struggle for the Leninist Party, to learn the art of organizing from members of the Politburo, the Organizational Bureau, and especially in daily contact with the secretaries of the Central Committee and its General Secretary of the Central Committee, Comrade Stalin. 173 Kaganovich goes on to compare Stalin and the Party to a symphony, stating "even the best orchestra needs a conductor. And I can say with all objectivity that in this Bolshevik qualified orchestra, a talented conductor, Comrade Stalin, already showed up.' "174 Here, his praises for Stalin are specifically related to how Stalin handled the question of nationalism by arguing for eliminating the 'national-chauvinism' which had begun to develop under the NEP program, while simultaneously making concessions to some of the national elements that were still loyal to 173 Kaganovich, Pamiatnye zapiski, 349. 174 Ibid. 45 55#50Communism. 175 Stalin's goal was “the gradual elimination of the gigantic economic and cultural inequality that [they] inherited from the period of tsardom."176 In his memoir, Kaganovich wholeheartedly agrees with Stalin's argument and instructs his readers that “every communist should remember: I am a communist, therefore I must make concessions to local national loyal elements, which does not exclude, but presupposes a systematic ideological struggle for the principles of Marxism and for genuine internationalism against a bias towards nationalism."177 This statement shows a much different stance than his earlier claims about bullying Zionists and using the Bible in a Bolshevik context to dispel arguments about Zionism. 178 Kaganovich does not mention Zionism or his Jewish roots often, but when he does it is quite negative. In one passage, he accuses Zionism of being American imperialist tool that "pursues a racist policy and various predatory actions," specifically regarding the Middle East. 179 He also declares that in his youth, Zionist Jewish nationalists "sought to instill distrust and hostility towards Russian and Ukrainian workers in the working poor Jews," but they were unsuccessful because "the bulk of the Jewish working poor, and especially, as [he] later saw in Kiev, Jewish workers in Ukraine have not succumbed to national chauvinism.”180 Furthermore, "they saw and knew that the Russian proletariat were fighting for the liberation of all oppressed nations against the oppression of Ukrainians, Poles, Jews, and all oppressed nations of tsarist 175 Ibid, 329-330. 176 Ibid, 326. 177 Ibid, 330. 178 Ibid, 94. 179 Ibid, 86. 180 Ibid, 47. 446#51Russia."181 Notably, Kaganovich and his brothers also refused to join the Bund, even though it was Communist and anti-Zionist. 182 The national chauvinism that Kaganovich references above is clearly reflective of Stalin's language on nationalities. Stalin and Kaganovich's relationship would continue to grow in the early 1920s. Kaganovich recalls this era as one of particular closeness within the Party leadership, of which he was now included. He fondly recalls how on nights walking around the Kremlin, he, Stalin, Molotov, Kuibyshev, "and whoever else" would joke and talk to each other as friends. 183 He notes there was little security, and the Party leadership were small in number and exceptionally close; "That was the kind of period it was,” he recalls. 184 "It was a happy period of life. And Stalin was in a good mood. Sometimes we would sit for ages around a table "185 chatting." During these years, Kaganovich was also regularly invited to Stalin's dacha with others such as Molotov or Bukharin, and they would enjoy “long convivial gatherings” together there. 186 Kaganovich's political rise and close relationship with Stalin paid off when Stalin appointed him as the general secretary of the Ukrainian Communist Party in 1925. He held that position until 1928, when he was replaced by Stanislav Kosior. 187 Kaganovich was sent to Ukraine to perform a number of tasks, most notably imposing the Ukrainization policy that 181 Ibid. 182 Rees, Iron Lazar, 6. 183 Chuev, Tak govoril Kaganovich, 190. 184 Ibid. 185 Ibid. 186 Ibid, 75. 187 Kaganovich, Pamiatnye zapiski, 61. 12 47#52resulted from the 1923 resolutions on nationalities. This policy was highly controversial and caused political difficulties for Kaganovich. Nevertheless, when he returned back to Moscow under Stalin's orders, he recalled “despite the difficulties of working in Ukraine, I was sorry to leave because I grew up in Ukraine, joined the underground organization of the Party there in Kiev, over the past three years I have invested all my strength and energy to the construction of a socialist Ukraine, but I have not interrupted ties with it."188 After returning to Moscow his power and importance to both Stalin and the broader Soviet system only continued to expand. From 1930 to 1935, Kaganovich was at the height of his power, and he took on increasingly more responsibility accordingly. In 1934, Kaganovich was serving in so many roles, he actually had to ask the Politburo to relieve him of one of his posts, particularly as head of the transportation department. 189 Kaganovich remained tied to numerous major government and Party posts, including being "simultaneously a secretary of the Party Central Committee - actually Stalin's deputy in the Party - and the head of the Party organization in the capital city, Moscow, and Stalin's deputy in the Defense Commission, the supreme body concerned with decisions about defense, attached to both the Politburo and Sovnarkom."190 Kaganovich and Stalin's close relationship extended to personal affairs as well. It was Kaganovich who spoke at Stalin's wife's funeral, at the request of Stalin himself who was unable to speak from grief. 191 In 188 Ibid, 392. 189 Oleg Khlevniuk, Master of the House: Stalin and His Inner Circle, (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2008), 94. 190 Joseph Stalin and L. M. Kaganovich, in Davies, R. W., Oleg V. Khlevniuk, E. A. Rees, Liudmila P. Kosheleva, and Larisa A. Rogovaya. The Stalin-Kaganovich Correspondence, 1931-36, (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2003), 3. 191 Sebag Montefiore, Simon, Stalin: The Court of the Red Tsar, (New York: Vintage Books, 2003), 107. 48#53his biography of Stalin, Sebag Montifore includes an amusing story of Stalin actually making Kaganovich remove his beard and helping him do so at a family dinner. 192 193 Kaganovich was not only important to Stalin, but in the public as well. Rees notes that Kaganovich had a ‘cult' following, though it was much smaller and more modest than Stalin's. Anita Pisch also indicates this by stating "Stalin may have been the 'man of steel,' but Lazar Kaganovich, who was the people's commissar for transport and was responsible for building the Moscow Metro, also had a cult following and was known as 'Iron Lazar' and 'Iron Commissar."194 Simon Sebag Montifore also notes how “Kaganovich was celebrated ... and in "195 thousands of pictures at parades." Kaganovich even had songs and poems written about him. One that is highlighted in the interview So Spoke Kaganovich states "With this song we meet the People's Commissar, Dear Commissar of the Way! ... The sun is spreading, Kaganovich smiles at the song - Stalin's People's Commissar!"196 This song is more general, but many are about his work in construction of the Moscow Metro. One Yiddish song actually praises Molotov and Kaganovich after denouncing religious leaders. It states “Down with the priest, Down with the rabbi, I elect comrade Molotov To be my deputy. We are happy, We are full, Comrade 192 Ibid, 41. 193 Rees, Iron Lazar, 159. 194 Anita Pisch, The Personality Cult of Stalin in Soviet Posters, 1929-1953: Archetypes, Inventions and Fabrications: Archetypes, Inventions and Fabrications, (Canberra, Australia: The Australian National University Press, 2016), 75. 195 Sebag Montefiore, Stalin: The Court of the Red Tsar, 165. 196 Chuev, Tak govoril Kaganovich, 15. 49#54Kaganovich is our deputy." "197 The joyful and celebratory tone of the songs speaks to the level of popular acclaim Kaganovich achieved. 198 A 1931 image of Kaganovich standing on Lenin's Mausoleum Tribune directly next to Maxim Gorky is one of the most symbolic visual representations of his full rise in power." Early in his memoir Kaganovich recalls reading Gorky as a young proletariat worker in Kiev. 199 Almost 20 years later, Kaganovich is pictured standing directly next to him on Lenin's mausoleum in Moscow, no longer a teenage worker with dreams of revolution, but a top member in the Soviet government and Stalin's deputy in the Communist Party. Ultimately, during the 1930s Kaganovich was an indispensable figure within Moscow life and Stalin's inner circle. Soviet Jewish Policy in the 1930s One result of Kaganovich's political success was his eventual role in many of the well- known horrors that occurred under Stalin's reign. In the beginning of the 1930s, the push for modernization, industrialization, and collectivization produced the famine in Ukraine, also known as the Holodomor, and elsewhere from 1932-1933. Kaganovich played a large role in the collectivization policies that led to the disaster. 200 In his memoir, Kaganovich oversimplifies the matter by reducing the issues of collectivization, grain procurement, and the unrest among the peasantry to simply “kulaks” who refused the "delivery of bread to the state, putting the entire socialist reconstruction in danger of disruption;” he does not seem to grasp the severity of the 197 Anna Shternshis, Soviet and Kosher: Jewish Popular Culture in the Soviet Union, 1923-1939, (Indiana University Press, 2006), 118. 198 Photograph 3. 199 Kaganovich, Pamiatnye zapiski, 54-56. 200 In Anne Applebaum's account of the Holodomor in Red Famine, she notes that Kaganovich, along with Stalin, Molotov, Kosior, and Postyshev were tried and found guilty of "perpetuating genocide" in a 2010 Ukrainian court case. While the judge terminated the case as the men found guilty were all dead by then, the fact that a case occurred in 2010 shows the long enduring impact the tragedy had on Ukraine. (Anne Applebaum, Red Famine: Stalin's War on Ukraine, (New York: Doubleday, 2017), 351. 50 50#55201 situation.² Naturally, he also defends himself and his actions when he claims "opportunists of all kinds are always inclined to belittle the role and importance of the Party when it comes to positive results of work, at the same time they are always inclined to exaggerate the guilt of the Party and its leadership when difficulties and malfunctions appear in economic and social construction." "202 203 In 1932, Stalin's dictatorship also reached a new level. Along with the growth of Stalin's dictatorship and the enforcement of his 'revolution from above' was a noticeable change in the Soviet Union's policy towards Jews. As Gitelman describes, there was a clear link between Stalin's modernization goals and the change in nationality policy. This was primarily because: Stalin's ambitious plans demanded the centralization of political power, economic resources, and mass energies ... The regime could not afford to tolerate, let alone encourage, multiple ethnic loyalties in the USSR, and it now perceived the 'flowering of various national cultures' as a potentially centrifugal force which would distract the energies of the various nationalities from the central task of the modernization of the entire country.20 204 This 1930s ideological change about nationalities was intended to help centralize power under Stalin during his modernization efforts, but it had negative effects on national groups in the Soviet Union. As a result of this change, by 1930, Stalin had deemed the work of the Evkom and the Evsektsiia successful and the assimilation of the Jews being 'complete.' 205 The Evsektsiia 201 Kaganovich, Pamiatnye zapiski, 413. 202 Ibid, 337. 203 Rees, Iron Lazar, 123. 204 Gitelman, Assimiliation, Acculturation, and National Consciousness, 16. 205 Yuval-Davis, "Marxism and Jewish Nationalism," 101. 51#56was removed in 1930 (the Evkom was dissolved earlier in 1924). 206 However, Stalin's policy approach was highly inconsistent, and even paradoxical; the earlier policy of supporting non- Jewish national movements that were "Socialist in content, nationalist in form" was abandoned for other nationalities, but now applied to Jews. As a continuation of the failed 1920's attempt to create a Jewish agricultural territory in Northern Crimea and the Southern Ukraine territory of Kuban, the Soviet government established a new territory as a Soviet Jewish homeland in Siberia, called Birobidzhan. 207 This territory was approved as a "Jewish agricultural settlement” in 1928, and in 1930 it was declared a Jewish National Region.2 Then, in 1934, Birobidzhan was given status as an 209 208 autonomous region.2 The territory comprised an area “larger than Holland and Belgium combined," and was presented as a “new Zion. "210 Considering the territory was located in the Soviet Far East and was established as an agricultural territory, it was not popular. Jews, who had achieved successful levels of assimilation, were not interested in leaving their lives behind to become Siberian farmers. In addition to the failed 'Soviet Zion' of Birobidzhan, Stalin also introduced new policies in the 1930s that would further separate Jews from the rest of society, despite earlier promoting their assimilation. The most obvious example is the introduction of identity cards in 1932. Now, "Jewishness became a non-voluntary category foisted on every child of Jewish parents, thus 206 Ibid, 102. 207 Slezkine, The Jewish Century, 248. 208 Ibid. 209 Alessandro Vitale, "Ethnopolitics as Co-operation and Coexistence: The Case Study of the Jewish Autonomous Region in Siberia," Politeja, no. 31/2 (2015): 127. 210 Vitale, "Ethnopolitics," 124. 52#57effectively shutting off the possibility of genuine long-term social assimilation.”211 As Slezkine notes, these identification cards solidified nationality as a “permanent label and one of the most 9212 The important official predicators of admissions and promotions in the Soviet Union.” identification cards and the Birobidzhan project are on one hand contradictory with the 1920's assimilation efforts, but on the other hand, they are a direct result of the assimilation policies because they produced more assimilation, and of a different kind, than was intended. Jews in the Soviet Union, particularly their economic success, were seen by the Party as "ideologically suspect" because, as a community, they were “at the same time an extra- territorial national minority, a religious community in an atheist state, and an ethnic group on the brink of "213 assimilation into Sovietism." However, unlike much of the Jewish community, Kaganovich was not deemed "ideologically suspect" because of his Jewish roots - rather, it was his unwavering, and apparently genuine dedication to Stalin and Communism that kept him safe from any persecution he may have faced on the grounds of his Jewish heritage. While Kaganovich was never attacked or exiled from the Party for being Jewish, he did receive criticism and critiques, especially from abroad during the rise of WWII. Kaganovich was not alone in this as during the late 1930s Jews began to face growing discrimination and rising antisemitism in the Soviet Union. 214 During the Purges, Jews were not targeted specifically because of their Jewishness, but they suffered along with the rest of the Union.2. 215 After the 211 Yuval-Davis, "Marxism and Jewish Nationalism," 102. 212 Slezkine, The Jewish Century, 285. 213 Vitale, 126. 214 Sebag Montefiore, Stalin: The Court of the Red Tsar, 305. 215 Slezkine, The Jewish Century, 273. 53#58purges, any remaining Jewish cultural institutions were irreparably damaged.2 216 217 Kaganovich, on the other hand, was one of the main actors during the Purges and is often remembered for his viciousness in carrying out Stalin's aggression towards others.² Khrushchev recalled that when "incited by Stalin, Kaganovich played the part of a vicious cur who was unleashed to tear limb from limb any member of the Politburo on whom he sensed Stalin's coolness."218 During the purges, Kaganovich was included with Molotov, Voroshilov, 219 and Zhdanov as the top signatories of death sentences after Stalin.2 Kaganovich also personally oversaw the purges in cities outside of Moscow with "more panache and dramatic effects" than others, including "shouting and hectoring," all while frequently reporting back to Stalin, often several times a day.220 Kaganovich's ruthlessness was not originally a defining trait, but after years beside Stalin in a top spot in Soviet politics, he developed a different attitude. Kaganovich's ruthlessness was also extended towards other Jews, which shows how far Kaganovich had separated himself from the Jewish community. According to Sebag Montefiore, Kaganovich ardently despised Yiddish culture. 221 His deep separation from the Jewish community is also visible in his reaction to the Jewish Antifascist Committee (JAFC) formed in December 1941 and popularized by 1942.222 According the Rees, Kaganovich did not join and 216 Gitelman, Assimiliation, Acculturation, and National Consciousness, 18. 217 "Khruschev on Stalin" in Benjamin Pinkus and Jonathan Frankel, The Soviet Government and the Jews, 1948- 1967: A Documented Study, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 1984), 107. 218 "Khruschev on Stalin" in The Soviet Government and the Jews, 1948-1967: A Documented Study, 107. 219 Sheila Fitzpatrick, On Stalin's Team: The Years of Living Dangerously in Soviet Politics, (Melbourne: Melbourne University Publishing, 2015), 126 220 Ibid, 127. 221 Sebag Montefiore, Stalin: The Court of the Red Tsar, 306. 222 Rees, Iron Lazar, 245. 54#59"223 instead "remained aloof from this body." In fact, it was actually Kaganovich who Stalin sent to dispel what he called "Jewish California," but was really just another proposal by members of the JAFC for a new Jewish territory to be formed in Crimea after the failures of the previous two 224 attempts. The JAFC did not survive for long, however, and its existence spoke more about Soviet efforts to gain international support during World War II than any popular movement on behalf of the Jewish population. As Sebag Montefiore and Fitzpatrick both note, the organization, though publicly headed by well-known Jewish figures, was actually set up by Stalin as a tool for getting money from American Jews and publicizing the Soviet cause internationally. 225 226 In Kaganovich was regularly spared from anti-Semitic attacks, and Stalin avoided making anti-Semitic remarks around Kaganovich. Sebag Montefiore attributes Stalin's lack of anti- Semitism towards Kaganovich to that fact that many of his enemies such as Trotsky, Zinoviev, and Kamenev were Jewish, yet Kaganovich was a loyal supporter, from humble origins.2 other words, Stalin “hated the intellectual Trotsky but had no problem with the cobbler Kaganovich.”227 Stalin's high regard for Kaganovich, and Kaganovich's own separation from his Jewish past, ultimately saved him during the 1953 Doctor's Plot. Ultimately, Kaganovich's rise to power was complete by the 1920s, and by 1930, he was in the highest position in the Soviet Union, second only to Stalin. While serving as Stalin's Deputy, Kaganovich's Jewish background affected him very little and his separation from the 223 Ibid. 224 Sebag Montefiore, Stalin: The Court of the Red Tsar, 546. 225 Fitzpatrick, On Stalin's Team, 200-201; Sebag Montefiore, Stalin: The Court of the Red Tsar, 545-546. 226 Sebag Montefiore, Stalin: The Court of the Red Tsar, 305. 227 Ibid. 55 55#60Jewish community seems to have been successful. In the later 1930s and into World War II, Kaganovich did receive criticism from abroad for his heritage, but Stalin, despite his own growing anti-Semitism, did not remove Kaganovich or separate himself from him. By the end of World War II, Kaganovich's power was waning, though he was unaffected during the Doctor's Plot, about which he did very little, despite the impact it had on the Jewish community. This only further emphasizes Kaganovich's own separation from his Jewishness. Ultimately, it is evident that Kaganovich saw his Jewishness as nothing more than a part of his background, not something that held any relevance to his life or his role in Soviet politics 56#61CONCLUSION Ultimately, it was Kaganovich's loyalty and absolute dedication to Stalin, as well as his reputation for ruthlessness, that led to his eventual downfall. As Molotov once stated, Kaganovich was a "two hundred percent Stalinist. "228 When Stalin died in 1953, Kaganovich remained loyal unlike others who began to turn away from his violent legacy. Furthermore, when Khrushchev initiated de-Stalinization in 1956, Kaganovich, along with Molotov, "sought to minimize the ideological dimension" of the movement and thus secured his own removal from the Party a few short years later. 229 Specifically, during the June 1957 Presidium meeting, Kaganovich joined Bulganin, Malenkov, Voroshilov, Molotov, Pervukhin, and Saburov in 230 demanding Khrushchev's removal.2 He was thus labeled as one of the leaders of the 'Anti-Party group' along with Malenkov and Molotov, and the group came under heavy attack. On June 28, they "capitulated, with each engaging in self-criticism before the Central Committee. "231 Rees describes Kaganovich as a “beaten man" when he admitted to the crime of conspiring against Khrushchev. 232 Even then, he refused to say his actions were anti-Party in nature. Kaganovich was removed from his position as minister of the construction materials 228 Ibid. 229 Rees, Iron Lazar, 254. 230 Ibid, 256-257. 231 Ibid, 257-258. 232 Ibid, 258. 57#62industry, and he and his wife left their Kremlin apartment for one close by on Lenin Hills. 233 Ultimately, Kaganovich's political life, ended in 1961 when he was dismissed from his role as the manager of the Ural Potash Works and then dismissed from the Party itself.234 Kaganovich describes his life after the Party as going back to square one, “to live as before the revolution.”235 He describes his fondness for conversations with fellow Muscovites and his pleasure in answering questions from those who would gather to speak with him. This served as contribution to what he calls the "warm and friendly attitude towards me and those who "236 surrounded and encouraged me.' He concludes that despite his removal from the Party and political life, life was good because he was able to communicate with others and he once again felt like "an old propagandist-agitator for the Party, for Marxism-Leninism, and for socialism- communism."237 Kaganovich's removal from the Party because of his refusal to denounce Stalin, among other reasons, is testament to his lifelong commitment to Stalin and Bolshevism. Kaganovich's last words in his memoir also affirm this. He writes: The enemies of socialism are not interested in humanity, about which they falsely clamor We will overcome difficulties if we fight the enemies of socialism, without admitting, of course, mistakes and lawlessness. Only by rallying all the ordinary people, first of all the working class, on the basis of an ideological and principled line, will we overcome all difficulties and move forward to the complete victory of Socialism, and then Communism!238 233 Ibid. 234 235 Ibid, 261. Kaganovich, Pamiatnye zapiski, 13. 236 Ibid. 237 Ibid. 238 Kaganovich, Pamiatnye zapiski, 526. 58 S#63It was this commitment, paired with his access to power, that placed Kaganovich above the rest of the Soviet Jewish community, in terms of power and status, despite sharing a similar upbringing with much of the Jewish population. Kaganovich's life began in Kabany, Ukraine, where he was born into a poor Jewish family with multiple siblings. His pursuit of a secular education and Russian language skills placed him on a very similar path to the Jewish youths participating in the Jewish revolution that brought so many young Jewish individuals into the ranks of revolution. Kaganovich followed the common path of joining the workforce in the city, engaging in self-education, and participating in revolutionary circles, but during the years between 1914-1917, Kaganovich's life diverted from the typical path of the Jewish revolution. His dedication to Bolshevism projected him farther than his peers, and his additional lack of concern for Jewish issues separated him further. Kaganovich was not the only Jewish individual to pursue Bolshevism and leave behind his Jewishness, but he did achieve the highest level of standing compared to any other Jew in the Soviet Union by becoming Stalin's deputy and trusted ally for so long. Kaganovich's path ultimately diverged from the more common Soviet Jewish experience in the 1920s, and his Jewish background played little role in his politics. Overall, Kaganovich's career was that of someone who, despite participating in the Jewish revolution, rose above the rest of the Jewish community, fully separated himself from it, and achieved one of the most powerful careers in the Soviet Union. Kaganovich's overwhelming success at becoming Soviet can be linked to his unyielding devotion to Marxism-Leninism, the Bolshevik movement, and Stalin. Rees describes this aspect of Kaganovich's character as important in the fact that it is the best representation of the closed- system nature of the Stalinist system. While likely accurate, reducing Kaganovich's life and 59#64career to a mere indicator of the nature of Stalinism robs us of the ability to attempt to understand his life as he himself describes it. The connection between Kaganovich and the Jewish community is a primary example, and it is only referenced briefly by Rees in regard to Kaganovich's background and ethnicity. Additionally, throughout Kaganovich's memoir it is clear that he was a true, genuine believer of Communism and a Stalinist until he died. Rees shows this, but his overall use of Kaganovich as a case study robs Kaganovich of some of his agency by focusing the analysis of his actions on their relation to Stalin and not on where they came from or how they may have developed. In the end, Kaganovich survived longer than any of his contemporaries. It was not until July 1991, just months before the Soviet Union collapsed, that Kaganovich passed away. He requested that his tombstone say 'Bolshevik-Leninist,' but his request was denied. 239 239 Rees, Iron Lazar, 269 660#65BIBLIOGRAPHY Primary Sources Chuev, Feliks. Tak govoril Kaganovich: ispoved' stalinskogo apostola. Moskva: "Otechestvo;" [S.1.]: Distributed by East View Publications, 1992. Kaganovich, L. M. Pamiatnye zapiski rabochego, kommunista-bol'shevika, profsoiuznogo, partiĭnogo i sovetsko-gosudarstvennogo rabotnika. Moskva: Vagrius, 1996. Stalin, Joseph, and L. M. Kaganovich, in Davies, R. W., Oleg V. Khlevniuk, E. A. Rees, Liudmila P. Kosheleva, and Larisa A. Rogovaya. The Stalin-Kaganovich Correspondence, 1931-36. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2003. Stalin, Joseph. "The National Question and Leninism." New York: International Publishers, 1929. https://stars.library.ucf.edu/prism/286/. Secondary Sources Applebaum, Anne. Red Famine: Stalin's War on Ukraine. New York: Doubleday, 2017. Fitzpatrick, Sheila. On Stalin's Team: The Years of Living Dangerously in Soviet Politics. Melbourne: Melbourne University Publishing, 2015. Frankel Johnathan. Prophecy and Politics: Socialism, Nationalism, and the Russian Jews, 1862- 1917. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 1981. Gitelman, Zvi. Assimiliation, Acculturation, and National Consciousness Among Soviet Jews. New York: Institute for Jewish Policy Planning and Research of the Synagogue Council of America, 1973. Gitelman, Zvi Y. Jewish Nationality and Soviet Politics: The Jewish Sections of the CPSU, 1917- 1930. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1972. Haberer, Erich. Jews and Revolution in Nineteenth-Century Russia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995. Hosking, Geoffrey. The First Socialist Society: A History of the Soviet Union from Within. Cambridge, M.A.: Harvard University Press, 1990. Khlevniuk, Oleg V.. Master of the House: Stalin and His Inner Circle. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2008. Martin, Terry. The Affirmative Action Empire: Nations and Nationalism in the Soviet Union, 1923–1939. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2011. Pinkus, Benjamin, and Jonathan Frankel. The Soviet Govrnment and the Jews, 1948-1967: A Documented Study. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 1984. 61#66Pisch, Anita. The Personality Cult of Stalin in Soviet Posters, 1929-1953: Archetypes, Inventions and Fabrications: Archetypes, Inventions and Fabrications. Canberra, Australia: The Australian National University Press, 2016. Rees, E. A.. Iron Lazar: A Political Biography of Lazar Kaganovich. London: Anthem Press, 2012. Sebag Montefiore, Simon. Stalin: The Court of the Red Tsar. New York: Vintage Books, 2003. Shtakser, Inna. The Making of Jewish revolutionaries in the Pale of Settlement: Community and Identity during the Russian Revolution and its Immediate Aftermath, 1905-07. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2014. Slezkine, Yuri. The Jewish Century. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 2004. Sloin, Andrew. The Jewish revolution in Belorussia: Economy, Race, and Bolshevik Power. Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 2017. Ury, Scott. Barricades and Banners: The Revolution of 1905 and the Transformation of Warsaw Jewry. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2012. Vitale, Alessandro. "Ethnopolitics as Co-operation and Coexistence: The Case Study of the Jewish Autonomous Region in Siberia." Politeja, no. 31/2 (2015): 123–42. Wortman, Richard. Russian Monarchy: Representation and Rule. Boston: Academic Studies Press, 2013. Yuval-Davis, Nira. “Marxism and Jewish Nationalism." History Workshop 24 (Autumn 1987): 82-110. 62