2025 11/13 Ivan Sablin

Harriet Murav

Women Who Explained the World to Us: Polish Left Cultural Activists as Agents of Anti-Colonialism and Socialist Solidarity with the Global South in the Long Sixties and Beyond

Ivan Sablin substitutes for the Chair of Eastern European History and coordinates the Ladenburg Research Network “The Aggressor: Self-Perception and External Perception of an Actor Between Nations” at Heidelberg University, Germany. He also works at the Institute of Contemporary History, Ljubljana, Slovenia, where he heads the Project “Socialist Management in a Global Context: Technocratic Developments in the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia, 1955–1991.” His research interests include the history of the Russian Empire and the Soviet Union, with special attention to Siberia and the Russian Far East, and global intellectual history. He is the author of three monographs, including Parliaments in the Late Russian Empire, Revolutionary Russia, and the Soviet Union (Routledge, 2024), and research articles in Ab Imperio, Slavic Review, Nationalities Papers, and other journals. Ivan Sablin also co-edited a series of three volumes devoted to parliaments, single-party regimes, and federalism in Eurasian imperial transformations. He is the 2024 recipient of the Ab Imperio award for the best book. 

           Summary

In 1935, the Soviet leadership made a major concession to the liberal notion of modernity by announcing plans to introduce a “parliament.” The 1936 Constitution and the creation of the Supreme Soviet, however, did not alter the functioning of the single-party and personal dictatorship. The Supreme Soviet was, in practice, appointed by the Communist Party and had no agency in decision-making. Nevertheless, members of the Supreme Soviet performed practical functions in policy fine-tuning, serving as intermediaries between the state and the population. The Supreme Soviet also became a model for dependent regimes and, from 1955 onward, was permanently involved in foreign policy. Official takes on parliamentarism were ambiguous, but its complete rejection was not possible, since the Supreme Soviet was increasingly normalized as a parliament through international exchanges. During perestroika, efforts were made to democratize the Soviet system by introducing a new parliament — the Congress of People’s Deputies — and transforming the Supreme Soviet into a functioning legislature. Yet the unclear division of competence, frequent constitutional amendments, and the undetermined status of the Party eroded the reformed system. Ultimately, it proved impossible to combine the functions of a bureau for popular grievances with those of a legislature. The failure of central Soviet parliaments to resolve the economic and nationalities crises, and thus to reassemble the imperial space through political representation, contributed to the rise of republican parliaments and, ultimately, to the predominance of presidential systems across the (post-)Soviet space. 

Co-sponsored by Ab Imperio.

November 13, 2025 from 5-7:00 PM

Institute for the Humanities
BSB (Behavioral Sciences Building)
1007 W Harrison str., Suite 153