Jesse Walker | September 18, 2007
Alexander Zakharov's blog A Soviet Poster a Day is exactly what it sounds like. Some of the posters are quite striking:

Others are kind of creepy:

Actually, they're all creepy, since they're propaganda posters from a totalitarian state. In other words: Great stuff! Collect them all!
Elsewhere in Reason: I stand up for our right to enjoy commie kitsch.
[Hat tip: Jim Gill.]
Help Reason celebrate its next 40 years. Donate Now!
Try Reason's award-winning print edition today! Your first issue is FREE if you are not completely satisfied.
propaganda posters from a totalitarian state. In other
words: Great stuff!
So happy you approve, Comrade. The millions, they deserved what
they got.
Doesn't the jacked dude in the second poster look sort of like a young Arnold? Of course, for accuracy, an Arnold picture should have a woman in place of the young boy, but doing the exact same thing.
Add my vote for banning kyle. He just went through and spammed the active threads with identical posts, just like he did yesterday.
Doesn't the jacked dude in the second poster look sort of
like a young Arnold? Of course, for accuracy, an Arnold picture
should have a woman in place of the young boy, but doing the exact
same thing.
Also the Arnold poster would feature a swastika instead of the
hammer and sickle...
What is funny is that all of the bad public art done in this country in the 50s and 60s are just knock offs of this crap. There is a fountain where I went law school with a statue of a woman in the center holding this lamp, it looks like it could come right out of some "people's liberation park" in Gorky. It is just horrible. I don't mind the Soviet kitch. I do mind the American knockoffs polluting our public spaces.
You can also buy many
here
They really are a good conversation starter, or a good way to scare
away hyper-patriots, whichever you prefer.
I went to Riga, Latvia in 2002. In the center of town there was a 'museum of the occupation'. In the Soviet era, it was about the German occupation. After 1990, they started adding stuff from the Soviet occupation. There were a couple walls full of posters like this.
Episiarch: Yes. Also, it looks like he and the boy are wedged into the same pair of pants.
As per custom here, at some point this thread needs to include
claims of the superiority of privately made, American
propaganda.
You know, Spuds MacKenzie, "Where's the Beef?", etc.
The top poster must be very old - from the mid twenties at the
latest. It reminds me of Lissistsky's
Beat the Whites With the Red Wedge modernist propaganda
painting.
The Soviets started cracking down on abstract art pretty quickly,
and they had Socialist Realism for the next 5 decades. You'd think
that would have given the artistic community in free countries
pause, but no...
You know, Spuds MacKenzie, "Where's the Beef?",
etc.
Help! I've fallen and I can't get up!
Episiarch: Yes. Also, it looks like he and the boy are
wedged into the same pair of pants.
Pants were in short supply in the USSR. Long lines. Sometimes you
had to share.
I saw this once on TV during a sleepless night. Proof that the American military would have been woefully inadequate had the Cold War ever escalated, and we would have had our asses kicked in style.
I saw a few on Billary's (Hillary Clinton) campain workers wearing shirts with those very same posters silk screened on em.
I saw this once on TV during a sleepless night. Proof that
the American military would have been woefully inadequate had the
Cold War ever escalated, and we would have had our asses kicked in
style.
I think that was the original inspiration for Cop
Rock.
In the 1960s would you rather have been an American Black in
Alabama or, say, a teacher in Moscow? Both Apartheid in South
Africa and the Nuremburg laws in Nazi Germany were modeled on
American Jim Crow laws.
The Soviet Union was a bad place, but even communism had redeeming
features. And not everybody who was moved by Marxist idealism was
bad. American communists and socialists made major contributions to
the labor and civil rights movements. An American Socialist
candidate for president got way more votes than a Libertarian
candidate could ever dream of getting. Things are not quite as
black and white as Libertarian propagandists like to portray them.
Go back to your hymnals.
re propaganda, private vs. public, etc.. does anyone know/ever
hear what happened to the "mission accomplished" banner? I mean the
actual banner itself. Was it from the white house, from the navy
press office, or set up by some local outfit?
To hell with the blue dress. That banner is the genuine article of
tremendous historical value, and needs to be in a museum
somewhere.
Seriously, has there been any reporting done on the basics of the
banner, who paid for it/designed it, who made it, who hung it up,
and what happened to it afterwards?
I would like to echo the "Uncle Joe" troll above: we have a
moral obligation not to enjoy art that glorifies Communism.
And I would like to add to list of banned art, any work done for
the purpose of glorifying monarchism, the Divine Right of Kings, or
Christianity.
What, you think those peasants and heretics and Jews got what they
deserved?
I pity people who can't set aside politics long enough to
appreciate art.
I pity people who can't set aside politics long enough to
appreciate art.
Like lampshades made of human skin?
Seriously, has there been any reporting done on the basics
of the banner, who paid for it/designed it, who made it, who hung
it up, and what happened to it afterwards?
IIRC, the Bush administration claimed that the Navy had created and
put up the banner and the White House had nothing to do with
it.
Dan T.,
That's what they claimed, but it was the White House advance team
that produced and hung the banner (just like the do at almost every
other event Bush or Cheney attend). Their final claim was that they
were doing it at the request of the sailors aboard the USS Lincoln.
This was preceded by claims that the Navy produced and hung the
banner (later rescinded), and that the White House produced the
banner, but Navy personnel hung it (also later rescinded).
Link
"In the 1960s would you rather have been an American Black in
Alabama or, say, a teacher in Moscow? "
Unless I missed the Gulags that we locked up black Americans in and
worked them to death, I would rather be a black in the South. Not
that that was a picnic either, but that statemet betreys an
unimaginable historical ignorance on your part.
I just dig those Che T-shirts!
Who was he, anyway?
He has dreamy eyes!
John
Not everybody in the Soviet Union went to the gulags just as not
all Blacks in the American South got lynched. Stalin's purges
opened up a lot of oportunities for advancement, and even in the
worst days of the Stalinist terror, Stalin had his supporters. By
the 1960s the worst excesses of the Soviet Union were past, and the
average Soviet citizen had a better life by any measure than the
average rural Black in the American South.
I'm afraid you're the one who's betraying historical ignorance. But
you've got ther articles of faith and main dogmas down.
Joe,
You're right. A Ukrainian peasant in the 1930s would probably
gladly have gladly traded places with an American Black. So would a
Ukranian Jew, of course.
Edward,
You mean the same Soviet Union of the 60's which had Breznev's rise
to power?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leonid_Brezhnev
During the Khrushchev years Brezhnev had supported the leader's
denunciations of Stalin's arbitrary rule, the rehabilitation of
many of the victims of Stalin's purges, and the cautious
liberalization of Soviet intellectual and cultural policy. But as
soon as he became leader, Brezhnev began to reverse this process,
and developed an increasingly conservative and regressive attitude.
In a May 1965 speech commemorating the 20th anniversary of defeat
of Germany, Brezhnev mentioned Stalin positively for the first
time. In April 1966, he took the title General Secretary, which had
been Stalin's title. The trial of the writers Yuri Daniel and
Andrei Sinyavsky in 1966-the first such trials since Stalin's
day-marked the reversion to a repressive cultural policy. Under
Yuri Andropov the political police (the KGB) regained much of the
power it had enjoyed under Stalin, although there was no return to
the purges of the 1930s and 1940s.
Even the famous thaw during Khruschev's time in the 50's was very
limited...look at what happened to Boris Pasternak and his Nobel
Prize...
Notice that even during the "thaw," much shitty stuff still
happened and continued, the continuation of the INTERNAL passport
system:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passport_system_in_the_Soviet_Union
On October 21, 1953 the USSR Council of Ministers decreed the
new Passport Statute. It made passports obligatory for all citizens
older than sixteen years in all non-rural settlements. Rural
residents could not leave their place of residence for more than
thirty days, and even for this leave a permit from a selsoviet was
required. The notion of "temporary propiska" was introduced, in
addition to the regular or "permanent" one. A temporary propiska
was issued for work-related reasons and for study away from
home.
Hell, at least in the 60's US, the civil right movement picked up
speed and destroyed power of that the up-front racism at least
providing some hope, while in the USSR sure you could get
ok-to-shitty health care/welfare but the insidious hand of the
Soviet state was always watching...and if you got it wrong, bam, to
the gulag or a mental institution you went.
So no Edward, I still say the USSR was worse.
and if you got it wrong, bam, to the gulag or a mental
institution you went.
Bah, I went hyperbolic there. Sorry.
But even if that line was redacted, the USSR was a shitty place to
live in...
hyperbolic?
Man, just forget that...
Tell you what, just forget the last post and the last 2 paragraphs
of that first post of mine...or something...
I dunno, the USSR sucks.
Edward seems to think the most banal historical facts are bold truths that somehow challenge the libertarian worldview. Some people supported Stalin! Life under Brezhnez was bearable! Communists were active in the civil rights movement! Eugene Debs got a lot of votes! Uh...no shit.
Actually, Jesse, he seems to think that certain banal historical
truths challenge the worldview of some of the denser
libertarians.
Which they do.
Looks like one more time to thank goodness we have random Blues around to defend the good name of left-wing totalitarians.
Looks like one more time to thank goodness we have random Reds
around to defend the good name of Jim Crow segregation.
The difference is, I'm kidding.
As per custom here, at some point this thread needs to
include claims of the superiority of privately made, American
propaganda.
You know, Spuds MacKenzie, "Where's the Beef?", etc.
Ah, yes. I still remember when the propagandists of the Coca-Cola
regime forced New Coke upon us.
We groan beneath its foul-tasting yoke to this this day.
Shall classic Coke never return?!
On da otha han' ... ain't nobody a-gwyne to make a fuss ifn I
'preciates a good old Uncle Remus story fum awr ol' days,
is dey? Dey wairn all dat bad neither. Fair be fair.
Zippity doo dah!
Damn, those commies did cool art!
Now, if we can somehow separate the human suffering (that made
those propaganda posters possible) from the artistic merit of the
committee-sanctioned collaborators, we'll have something to enjoy
these many years later.
But why fret over the past?
Hell, it's art!
the average Soviet citizen had a better life by any measure
than the average rural Black in the American South
No....not even close.
"Actually, Jesse, he seems to think that certain banal
historical truths challenge the worldview of some of the denser
libertarians."
Denser libertarians are what the Stalists called the masses. Wacko
Aaron Russo is a convenient hero to hold up for the masses to
admire. 9/11 truthers are nuts, but objectively good for the
movement. The Libertarian vanguard is shamless.
The only caption I can think of for the second poster would make
Pat Robertson's head explode.
With respect to Soviet Era art in general: There was much
innovation in the early 1920's, when I think the first poster dates
to. A great deal of very interesting work was done by artists who
truly believed in the Communist regime. However, once "Socialist
Realism" became the official line in Soviet Art, it quickly
degenerated into the sort that the second poster represents. It is
really indistinguishable from the art of [Godwin edit] or the
"public health" posters produced in the 1950s promoting
vaccinations or washing your hands after going to the toilet.
The comparison with early advertizing art is not out of line. Most
advertizing art was (and is now) incredibly bad.
John: "Unless I missed the Gulags that we locked up black
Americans in and worked them to death, I would rather be a black in
the South. Not that that was a picnic either, but that statemet
betreys an unimaginable historical ignorance on your part."
Parchman Farm was a Cotton Curtain Kolyma.
See http://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.cgi?path=22500870194459
"During the Cold War years an article of faith that distinguished
the West from the 'Evil Empire' of Soviet Communism was the
latter's Siberian gulag, a vast network of prison camps where
inmates faced unspeakable brutality and horrors from both nature
and man. Of course, nothing of that kind could flourish here.
According to David Oshinsky, the U.S. did indeed have its own
gulag, and it went by the name of Mississippi. Parchman Farm was
its 'first circle.'"
See also
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mississippi_State_Penitentiary
"In 1970 the Civil Rights lawyer Roy Haber began taking statements
from inmates, which eventually ran to fifty pages of details of
murders, rapes, beatings and other abuses suffered by the inmates
from 1969 to 1971. In 1972 in the case of Gates v. Collier decided
in federal court, federal judge William C. Keady found that
Parchman Farm violated modern standards of decency."
ed,
Time heals all wounds.
People look at the lovely painting of knights and battles from
Europe a few centuries back without their consciences bothering
them.
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245