Examining the rich and sometimes volatile history of the Russian empire and Soviet control, Chap. 2 investigates the historical underpinnings of Kazakhstan-Russia ties. It follows the Russian Empire’s expansion into the Kazakh steppe and its absorption of Kazakh territory under policies ignoring local customs and autonomy, causing major disturbance and cultural loss. Significant events include forced collectivization, sedentarization, and the 1930s famine—known as Asharshylyk—showcase the terrible effect of Soviet policies on Kazakh society, which suffered significant losses in people, way of life, and legacy. This chapter examines the phenomenon of “othering,” in which Soviet officials, seeing Kazakh nomads as backward, justified punitive regulations ignoring the particular socioeconomic dynamics of nomadic existence. Nonetheless, the Soviet era also brought infrastructure, education, and healthcare improvements, turning Kazakhstan into an industrialized, metropolitan country. Notwithstanding these changes, Kazakhstan’s current identity and complex relationship with its Soviet heritage are shaped by the conflict between repression and modernization. Four interpretive frameworks—critical, positive, nuanced, and taboo—that capture various popular and academic perspectives on the Soviet legacy in Kazakhstan are discussed in Chap. 2 . These points of view highlight the continuing reevaluation of Kazakhstan’s historical narrative and the continuing impact of policies from the Soviet era, therefore laying a basis for knowledge of its present geopolitical posture and goals for a post-Soviet identity.

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

Conflicting Narratives: Two Approaches to Understanding Kazakhstan’s Soviet Past

  • Nygmet Ibadildin,
  • Dinara Pisareva,
  • Nurmakhan Tastaibek

摘要

Examining the rich and sometimes volatile history of the Russian empire and Soviet control, Chap. 2 investigates the historical underpinnings of Kazakhstan-Russia ties. It follows the Russian Empire’s expansion into the Kazakh steppe and its absorption of Kazakh territory under policies ignoring local customs and autonomy, causing major disturbance and cultural loss. Significant events include forced collectivization, sedentarization, and the 1930s famine—known as Asharshylyk—showcase the terrible effect of Soviet policies on Kazakh society, which suffered significant losses in people, way of life, and legacy. This chapter examines the phenomenon of “othering,” in which Soviet officials, seeing Kazakh nomads as backward, justified punitive regulations ignoring the particular socioeconomic dynamics of nomadic existence. Nonetheless, the Soviet era also brought infrastructure, education, and healthcare improvements, turning Kazakhstan into an industrialized, metropolitan country. Notwithstanding these changes, Kazakhstan’s current identity and complex relationship with its Soviet heritage are shaped by the conflict between repression and modernization. Four interpretive frameworks—critical, positive, nuanced, and taboo—that capture various popular and academic perspectives on the Soviet legacy in Kazakhstan are discussed in Chap. 2 . These points of view highlight the continuing reevaluation of Kazakhstan’s historical narrative and the continuing impact of policies from the Soviet era, therefore laying a basis for knowledge of its present geopolitical posture and goals for a post-Soviet identity.