Skip to main content

Mennonite Dystopia: “Socializing” in the era of Collectivization

The 1942 village reports prepared for the German Reichsminister for the Occupied Eastern Territories document an almost complete breakdown of community life under Stalin in predominantly Mennonite communities.

To read them is to take a step into a dystopian world (note 1). Here is a small sample of responses to one of many questions; they are asked by the occupying German army to reflect on "socializing" (Geseligkeit)—having fun, meeting socially with others—as they experienced it during the recently ended communist period:

Adelsheim [Chortitza]: "Socializing during the period of collectivization came to a complete end. Because of the many frictions in the collective [farm], we became weary/wary (überdrüssig) of each other.”

Blumengart [Chortitza]: "Regarding our social life after collectivization, neighbour no longer wished to see neighbour.” Also: "A lack of clothing hinders social life amongst the youth in particular".

Chortitza [Town]: “Social life was extinguished in the Bolshevik period. If a few people got together, they became politically suspect. No one trusted the other anymore. That mutual distrust is now slowly fading.”

Franzfeld [Chortitza]: “Socializing ended completely during the Bolshevik period; slowly it is coming back to life, because people are beginning to trust each other more.”

Hochfeld [Chortitza]: “Social life ended completely under the Bolsheviks, especially with collectivization. We became weary /wary (überdrüssig) of each other. Earlier it was completely different. Farmers visited more and stuck together much more.”

Katharinovka [Borosenko]: “Socializing? That was unknown. From early till late, day in and day out, winter and summer (without a day of rest!) toiling on the collective farm without rhyme or reason … Life on the collective farm embittered the person; one hated the other, each lived for himself alone, in dreary brooding, without hope of a better future.”

Kronstal [Chortitza]: "Socializing disappeared almost completely with the collective system. Everyone is very happy if on a Sunday he can finally stay away from the community for a few hours and be alone to himself."

Neuhorst [Chortitza]: "Socializing was completely extinguished by the collective system; people had long become weary/wary (überdrüssig) of each other.”

Nikolaifeld [Chortitza]: “Socializing during the period of the collectivization stopped completely. Earlier, visiting with neighbours was very normal, but even that came to an end. On the collective farm and with the Bolshevistic assemblies people became wary/weary (überdrüssig) of each other. ... In 1929 a five-day week was introduced [i.e., no weekend], and then in 1932 the six-day week, and later again the seven-day week. From April to December there was no day of rest on the collective farm.”

Osterwick [Chortitza]: "Abject poverty and lack of clothing were also reasons for limited socializing at weddings, funerals and similar events. Earlier there was also a radio station that could be accessed from the loudspeakers in the homes.”

Rosenbach [Chortitza]: “With collectivization, socializing came to a complete stop. In the past years, wedding celebrations and other folk festivities also ceased.”

Rosengart [Chortitza]: "As is the case everywhere, socializing virtually stopped with collectivization; but it is also getting somewhat better in this regard compared to a year ago. Nonetheless, because of utter poverty, especially the lack of clothing, people hardly come together even at festive occasions.”

Schönhorst [Chortitza]: “In the past years, the beautiful German wedding celebrations were fewer and fewer. Earlier the churches too had organized children’s festivals together with neighbouring villages. Slowly social gatherings are coming back to life, but it is still in its early stage.”

While these reports were written under the Nazi-occupation regime, the claims are supported even by the extant literature in the villages in the 1930s and by the files of those arrested in the purge, 1937-38 (note 2).

With parents largely absent on the collective farm (or arrested), childrearing and formational instruction in the 1930s was largely out of their hands (note 3). Some German-language reading materials for the local Young Pioneer groups encouraged children and youth to turn against parents and neighbours to help with the problem of “German espionage.” Columns in the Pioneer Pravda (Truth) youth paper and “spy booklets”—with titles like “Be on alert!,” “Stranger with a Bundle,” etc.—taught young people that their own “watchful and attentive eyes” made them “good helpers” of the NKVD secret police. They too may be able “to discover traces of the enemy,” and perhaps even “detain and expose the vile intentions of spies” (note 4).

This message mirrored the adult literature in each village “Red Corner” reading room and in the mandatory subscription materials for Komsomol and Party members (note 5). A popular booklet translated into German, for example, was N. Abusow’s 1937 booklet Gestapo. “In recruiting spies and other vermin the German spy service tries to exploit the German population concentrated in certain districts. The Gestapo directs its focus to places of significant German population ... including the German villages in the Ukraine.” Abusow called for “honest citizens” to join the work of Soviet counter-intelligence services.

The support that the women sought to preserve among themselves after the purge (1937-38), for example, was also infiltrated and shattered by the planting of Soviet-friendly activists in the community. Each file of the thousands arrested includes testimonies of local informants. Stalin successfully manufactured and transmitted paranoia and fear from above, generating terror at the regional and village levels below tearing the fabric—almost completely—of Mennonite life in Ukraine. Every Mennonite village was impacted as the village reports suggest. Socializing ended, and no one had courage left to say, wish, or hope anything.

Nazi German occupation forces in Ukraine found Mennonites depleted and broken—physically, mentally, socially and spiritually—from Stalinist repression. “Every individual initiative in them has been killed or stifled, because to be an individual is to be suspect, in danger of being reported. They hesitate to express any private opinions, fearing … spies are still at work” (note 6).

Decades later Eduard Reimer summed up the experience and its life-long impact:

“It is practically impossible to imagine how afraid everybody was in the villages at that time. Already as children and especially as teens, we learned to put on a false face and were compelled to hide our true thoughts and feelings. I believe that this forced two-facedness left many of my generation with life-long inhibitions. . . . I was compelled—like most in the village and in school—always to have two faces, one that was shown outwardly, and one that was turned inward. Nothing in my life has been more repulsive to me." (Note 7)

Katie Friesen recalled : “We lived in fear of those who would take what little we had left. … not even neighbours and friends could be trusted. One never knew when one would become a scapegoat for the purposes of the state” (note 8). Similarly Victor Janzen: “[Y]ou did not know anymore whom you could trust. …Many a wound, inflicted in those days, is not quite healed even today” (note 9).

Helene Dueck’s memories are most direct: “Honesty, diligence, brotherly love and willingness to help disappeared more and more. Everyone tried to get by in a selfish way, especially in the famine years when everything edible was scarce and thousands died of hunger. Many collaborated with the godless regime. They even betrayed their friends and relatives to save their lives. ... no one could be trusted. A wife often did not know what her husband was thinking, and the husband did not trust his own wife. Children would inform on their parents, and were praised for it at school. One did not know what was right and what was wrong, what was legal and what was illegal.” (Note 10)

I think of my grandmother's church women's group in the 1970s--all individuals who had endured this era. However I cannot imagine them in this context. In my children memory they were generally happy, sociable, somewhat stoic, and in hindsight clearly resilient.

            ---Arnold Neufeldt-Fast

---Notes---

Note 1: “Village Reports Commando Dr. Stumpp.” Prepared for the German Reichsminister for the Occupied Eastern Territories, 1942. In Bundesarchiv Koblenz, BArch, Special Unit Stumpp, R6 GSK, files 620 to 633; 702 to 709. From State Electronic Archive of Ukraine, https://tsdea.aewrchives.gov.ua/deutsch/. NB: better copies with no watermarks, https://invenio.bundesarchiv.de  (search e.g., by file: “R 6/620”).

Note 2: For a fuller treatment see my essay: “A new Examination of the ‘Great Terror’ in Molotschna, 1937–38,” Mennonite Quarterly Review 95, no. 4 (October 2021), 415–458, https://digitalcollections.tyndale.ca/handle/20.500.12730/1031.

Note 3: See previous post, https://russianmennonites.blogspot.com/2023/01/a-day-in-her-shoes-women-on-collective.html.

Note 4: Vanya Kuznetsova and Anya Kuznetsova, “Stranger with a Bundle” (Незнакомец со свертком), Pinerskaya Pravda (December 20, 1937), https://www.oldgazette.ru/pionerka/20121937/text3.html; V. Varmuzh, “Young helpers of glorious NKVD officers” (Юные помощники славных чекистов), Pionerskaya Pravda (Dec. 20,  1937), https://www.oldgazette.ru/pionerka/20121937/index1.html; Lev Zilver, Be on alert! (Быть на-чеку!) (Moscow: Molodaya Gvardiya, 1938), https://libking.ru/books/det-/det-espionage/445434-lev-zilver-byt-na-cheku.html.

Note 5: Cf. Andrej Kotljarchuk, “Propaganda of Hatred and the Great Terror: A Nordic Approach,” in Ethnic and Religious Minorities in Stalin’s Soviet Union: New Dimensions of Research, edited by Andrej Kotljarchuk and Olle Sundström (Huddinge: Södertörns, 2017), 95, https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:1166306/FULLTEXT01.pdf.

Note 6: Anonymous, “Zwischen Odessa and Perekop in den ersten Monaten des deutsch-russischen Krieges,” Mennonitisches Jahrbuch 1949, cited in Anne Konrad, Red Quarter Moon: A Search for Family in the Shadow of Stalin (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2012), 151.

Note 7: Eduard (Abram) Reimer, “Memoir.” Unpublished (n.d.), 22, 17, 26. From Mennonite Heritage Archives, Winnipeg, MB., Gerhard Lohrenz Fonds, 60, no. 63, vol. 3333. See partial English translation under pseudonym Eduard Allert (Lost Generation, edited by Gerhard Lohrenz [Steinbach, MB, 1982]).

Note 8: Katie Friesen, Into the Unknown (Steinbach, MB: Self-published, 1986), 29.

Note 9: Victor Janzen, From the Dniepr to the Paraguay River (Winnipeg, MB: Self-published, 1995), 27.

Note 10: Helene Dueck, Durch Trübsal und Not (Winnipeg, MB: Centre for Mennonite Brethren Studies, 1995), 16f., https://archive.org/details/durch-truebsal-und-not/mode/2up.

Print Friendly and PDF

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Fraktur (or Gothic) font and Kurrent- (or Sütterlin) handwriting: Nazi ban, 1941

In the middle of the war on January 1, 1942, the Winnipeg-based Mennonitische Rundschau published a new issue without the familiar Fraktur script masthead ( note 1 ). One might speculate on the reasons, but a year earlier Hitler banned the use of the font in the Reich . The Rundschau did not exactly follow all orders from Berlin—the rest of the paper was in Fraktur (sometimes referred to as "Gothic"); when the war ended in 1945, the Rundschau reintroduced the Fraktur font for its masthead. It wasn’t until the 1960s that an issue might have a page or title here or there with the “normal” or Latin font, even though post-war Germany was no longer using Fraktur . By 1973 only the Rundschau masthead is left in Fraktur , and that is only removed in December 1992. Attached is a copy of Nazi Party Secretary Martin Bormann's official letter dated January 3, 1941, which prohibited the use of Fraktur fonts "by order of the Führer. " Why? It was a Jewish invention, apparent...

The Jewish Colony (Judenplan) and its Mennonite Agriculturalists

Both Jews and Mennonites in Russia were dependent on separation, distinct external appearance, unique dialect, inner group cohesion, international familial networks, self-governing institutions, a sojourner mentality, sense of divine mission, and a view of the other as unclean or dangerous. Each had its distinct legal privileges, restrictions, and duties under the Tsar, and each looked out for their own. For both, moderation, spiritual values, family, learning and success were important, and their related dialects made communication possible. But the traditional occupation of eastern European Jews was as “middlemen” between the “overwhelmingly agricultural Christian population and various urban markets,” as peddlers, shopkeepers and suppliers of goods ( note 1 ). Jews were forbidden to stay for longer periods in German colonies or to erect houses or shops there. “If they try to stay, they are to be reported immediately. If they are not, the German mayor will be held responsible” ( no...

1929 Flight of Mennonites to Moscow and Reception in Germany

At the core of the attached video are some thirty photos of Mennonite refugees arriving from Moscow in 1929 which are new archival finds. While some 13,000 had gathered in outskirts of Moscow, with many more attempting the same journey, the Soviet Union only released 3,885 Mennonite "German farmers," together with 1,260 Lutherans, 468 Catholics, 51 Baptists, and 7 Adventists. Some of new photographs are from the first group of 323 refugees who left Moscow on October 29, arriving in Kiel on November 3, 1929. A second group of photos are from the so-called “Swinemünde group,” which left Moscow only a day later. This group however could not be accommodated in the first transport and departed from a different station on October 31. They were however held up in Leningrad for one month as intense diplomatic negotiations between the Soviet Union, Germany and also Canada took place. This second group arrived at the Prussian sea port of Swinemünde on December 2. In the next ten ...

Shaky Beginings as a Faith Community

With basic physical needs addressed, in 1805 Chortitza pioneers were ready to recover their religious roots and to pass on a faith identity. They requested a copy of Menno Simons’ writings from the Danzig mother-church especially for the young adults, “who know only what they hear,” and because “occasionally we are asked about the founder whose name our religion bears” ( note 1 ). The Anabaptist identity of this generation—despite the strong Mennonite publications in Prussia in the late eighteenth century—was uninformed and very thin. Settlers first arrived in Russia 1788-89 without ministers or elders. Settlers had to be content with sharing Bible reflections in Low German dialect or a “service that consisted of singing one song and a sermon that was read from a book of sermons” written by the recently deceased East Prussian Mennonite elder Isaac Kroeker ( note 2 ). In the first months of settlement, Chortitza Mennonites wrote church leaders in Prussia:  “We cordially plead ...

Catherine the Great’s 1763 Manifesto

“We must swarm our vast wastelands with people. I do not think that in order to achieve this it would be useful to compel our non-Christians to accept our faith--polygamy for example, is even more useful for the multiplication of the population. … "Russia does not have enough inhabitants, …but still possesses a large expanse of land, which is neither inhabited nor cultivated. … The fields that could nourish the whole nation, barely feeds one family..." – Catherine II (Note 1 ) “We perceive, among other things, that a considerable number of regions are still uncultivated which could easily and advantageously be made available for productive use of population and settlement. Most of the lands hold hidden in their depth an inexhaustible wealth of all kinds of precious ores and metals, and because they are well provided with forests, rivers and lakes, and located close to the sea for purpose of trade, they are also most convenient for the development and growth of many kinds ...

Formidable Fräulein Marga Bräul (1919–2011)

Fräulein Bräul left an indelible mark on two generations of high school students in the Mennonite Colony of Fernheim, Paraguay. Former students and acquaintances recall that Marga Bräul demanded the highest effort and achievements of her students, colleagues and of herself—the kind of teacher you either love or hate but will never forget! In March 1947, Marga was offered a position at the Fernheim Secondary School ( Zentralschule ). A recent refugee to Paraguay from war-torn Europe, she taught mathematics, physics, and chemistry. In 1952, she was the only female faculty member ( note 1 ). Marga wedded a strong commitment to academics with a passion for quality arts and crafts. She provided extensive extra-curricular instruction to students in handiwork and was especially renowned for her artwork—which included painting and woodworking— end of year art exhibits with students, theatre sets, and festival decorations. Marga’s pedagogical philosophy was holistic; she told Mennonite ed...

The Beginnings: Some Basics

The sixteenth-century ancestors of Russian Mennonites were largely Anabaptists from the Low Countries. Because their new vision of church called for voluntary membership marked by adult baptism upon confession of faith, they became one of the most persecuted groups of the Protestant Reformation ( note 1 ). For a millennium re-baptism ( a na -baptism) had been considered a heresy punishable by death ( note 2 ), and again in 1529 the Imperial Diet of Speyer called for the “brutal” punishment for those who did not recognize infant baptism. Many of the earliest Anabaptist cells were found in Belgium and The Netherlands--part of the larger Habsburg Empire ruled after 1555 by “the Most Catholic of Kings,” Philip II of Spain. The North Sea port cities of the Low Countries had some limited freedoms and were places for both commercial and cultural exchange; ships arrived daily not only from other Hanseatic League like Danzig, but also from Florence, Venice and Genoa, the Americas and the Far Ea...

Mennonite-Designed Mosque on the Molotschna

The “Peter J. Braun Archive" is a mammoth 78 reel microfilm collection of Russian Mennonite materials from 1803 to 1920 -- and largely still untapped by researchers ( note 1 ). In the files of Philipp Wiebe, son-in-law and heir to Johann Cornies, is a blueprint for a mosque ( pic ) as well as another file entitled “Akkerman Mosque Construction Accounts, 1850-1859” ( note 2 ). The Molotschna Mennonites were settlers on traditional Nogai lands; their Nogai neighbours were a nomadic, Muslim Tartar group. In 1825, Cornies wrote a significant anthropological report on the Nogai at the request of the Guardianship Committee, based largely on his engagements with these neighbours on Molotschna’s southern border ( note 3 ). Building upon these experiences and relationships, in 1835 Cornies founded the Nogai agricultural colony “Akkerman” outside the southern border of the Molotschna Colony. Akkerman was a projection of Cornies’ ideal Mennonite village outlined in exacting detail, with un...

Russia: A Refuge for all True Christians Living in the Last Days

If only it were so. It was not only a fringe group of Russian Mennonites who believed that they were living the Last Days. This view was widely shared--though rejected by the minority conservative Kleine Gemeinde. In 1820 upon the recommendation of Rudnerweide (Frisian) Elder Franz Görz, the progressive and influential Mennonite leader Johann Cornies asked the Mennonite Tobias Voth (b. 1791) of Graudenz, Prussia to come and lead his Agricultural Association’s private high school in Ohrloff, in the Russian Mennonite colony of Molotschna. Voth understood this as nothing less than a divine call upon his life ( note 1; pic 3 ). In Ohrloff Voth grew not only a secondary school, but also a community lending library, book clubs, as well as mission prayer meetings, and Bible study evenings. Voth was the son of a Mennonite minister and his wife was raised Lutheran ( note 2 ). For some years, Voth had been strongly influenced by the warm, Pietist devotional fiction writings of Johann Heinrich Ju...

Ukraine Independence--Russian Aggression--German Interests (1918)

The semi-autonomous Ukrainian People's Republic was established shortly after Russia's February Revolution in 1917. Much was still fluid, however. After the October Bolshevik Revolution the Central Rada of Ukraine in Kyiv declared full state independence from the Russian Republic on January 22, 1918. The Ukrainian People's Republic negotiated an end to its participation in Great War, and on February 9, 1918 signed a protectorate treaty in Brest-Litovsk. On February 17, Ukraine appealed to Germany and Austria-Hungary for assistance to repel Russian Bolshevik “invaders,” to detach Ukraine from Russia, and to establish conditions of stability. The World War had not yet ended. Imperialist Germany was desperate for grain and natural resources from Ukraine, eager to end the war in the east while containing Russia, and determined to establish post-war markets for German goods, technologies and influence ( note 1 ). For its part the Russian Bolshevik regime was eager to save ...