Slezin, A. A. The Soviet Youth of the 1920th – 1930th: Far Eastern Aspect (Review of the Book ‘Youth Movement and State Youth Policy in the Soviet Far East (November 1922 – June 1941)’ by Bilim, N. N. Published in Khabarovsk at Khabarovsk Border Institute of the Federal Security Service of the Russian Federation in 2013)

Abstract: The article contains the review of Natalya Nikolaevna Bilim’s monograph devoted to the youth movement and state youth policy in the Soviet Far East in the 1920th – 1930th (see Bilim, N. N. ‘Youth Movement and State Youth Policy in the Soviet Far East (November 1922 – June 1941)’ published in Khabarovsk at Khabarovsk Border Institute of the Federal Security Service of the Russian Federation in 2013). The importance of the topic is dictated not only by the historiographical signifi cance of that period when the basis of the Soviet political system was founded but also by the poor awareness of modern historians on the real life of the youth of the 1920th – 1930th. Ideologies created by the USSR Komsomol historians together with the accusatory writings of the late 1980th – 1990th created many myths but did not bring us any closer to the truth. According to the reviewer, the effi ciency of Komsomol activities should not be evaluated from the plain ‘effi cient-ineffi cient’ point of view, especially by the communist organizations themselves. Encouraging us to evaluate the Komsomol activities from the point of view of universal and state values, the reviewer notes that at least the book under review had certain prerequisites for that. Even though the reviewer sees the system of the ideological and political education of the youth as an element of the Soviet system of political control, he agrees to Natalya Bilim’s statement about the close relation between propaganda efforts of Komsomol and the tasks of literacy and overcoming drunkenness, immorality and nationalism. The true advantage of the book is the scientifi c criticism of publications and articles showing Komsomol as an organization with no creative potentials at all. At the same time, the reviewer also describes the minuses of the monograph under review.

Keywords: