Stalinist terror, marked by its unprecedented scale, fundamentally transformed the nature of state repression in the Soviet Union. Unlike previous regimes that primarily targeted political enemies, Stalin’s strategy involved the systematic arrest and execution of innocent individuals. This approach was not only devilishly clever but also significantly expanded the scope of terror, making even the most passive citizens potential victims. Before Stalin, dissenters would often keep their heads down, knowing that any sign of opposition could lead to punishment, limiting the regime’s bloody reach. However, under Stalin, innocents were ensnared under the guise of preventing future dissent, a far more insidious tactic.
The gulags, notorious labor camps, became filled not with political dissidents, but with everyday individuals who posed no threat to the system. Many of these prisoners were simply ordinary people who had lived by the principles of Russian compliance, showing loyalty to the state without question. Ironically, even committed communists, those who unwaveringly believed in the Soviet Union’s ideals, found themselves imprisoned, often for being associated with those deemed potentially disloyal.
In an account presented by Vassili Grossman in his novel “Everything Flows,” it is revealed that few among the imprisoned had actually fought against the Soviet power. Former czarist officers, for example, were not imprisoned for staging uprisings but simply because they could be expected to do so. Social democrats and social revolutionaries, who had been loyal to the regime, faced arrest not due to actions taken but because there was a mere possibility they would oppose the state in the future.
The targeting of innocents extended to peasants, who were deported based not on their actions but on their potential to resist collective farming policies. Mere expressions of mild criticism or complaints about state propaganda could land citizens in a prison cell. Correspondence with family members abroad made individuals suspect, implicating them in potential espionage, which served as grounds for imprisonment.
Amid this climate of fear, individuals who had actively opposed past regimes were sometimes respected by prison guards for their defiance, creating a strange dynamic where the truly innocent lived under the heavy burden of guilt imagined by the oppressive state machinery. Prisoners like Boris, an adolescent who had distributed anti-Soviet manifestos, garnered attention and admiration from officials, highlighting the absurdity and inversion of valor in a system that idolized imbecilic loyalty while punishing genuine dissent.
Despite this, most prisoners maintained a contagious belief in their innocence. Many, believing in the inherent justice of the world, thought their arrest was a clerical error. For instance, Maria Svanidze, niece by marriage to Stalin, kept a diary that revealed her naivety as she documented the rise of terror around her, which she only feared after it struck too close to home. Within a short time, she – akin to countless others – would find herself imprisoned amid the absurd excesses of a totalitarian state.
The preventive terror instituted under Stalin led to staggering casualties, with estimates of Soviet deaths around 20 million, as documented in the “Black Book of Communism.” The brutal suppression of dissent fed the gulag system, creating a horrific cycle of terror and complicity. Individuals like Maşa, who faced arrest for not denouncing their spouses, illustrate the despair created by the oppressive system. Convinced of their innocence, they awaited liberation, believing that the state would eventually recognize the supposed error in their arrest. This naïve hope often kept them psychologically unprepared for the grim realities of their new existence and eventual fates within the labor camps.
The narrative follows Maşa as an example of the many who maintained their hope despite the grim surroundings of their imprisonment. She anticipated that her innocence would eventually be acknowledged, leading her to cling to dreams of reunion with her husband and daughter. However, this misplaced trust didn’t shield her from the harsh realities of the gulag; she would ultimately remain imprisoned until her tragic death, still convinced that the state would rectify its mistake.
In conclusion, the Stalinist terror was uniquely and terrifyingly effective because it preyed on innocence and the deep-seated desire for justice. The system’s ability to manipulate public perceptions and instill a belief in one’s own virtuousness made the population vulnerable to the relentless machinery of repression. Victims believed in a lapse of judgment rather than calculating malevolence by the state, allowing the terror to thrive unchecked and unchallenged. Those who knew they were innocent became potential allies in the state’s oppressive reign, highlighting the tragic irony of an entire society ensnared without understanding its peril.
