Katy Rathman
Kotkin, Stephen. Magnetic Mountain: Stalinism as a Civilization. Berkeley: University of
California Press, 1995.
Researchers all over the world are studying the Soviet Union and the rise of Joseph Stalin
and Stalinism. Two distinct viewpoints emerge when comparing previous research by historians
of the U.S.S.R: the totalitarian school and the revisionist, who both scrutinize the Soviet Union
from two different perspectives. Stephen Kotkin in his monograph Magnetic Mountain Stalinism
as a Civilization critiques the Soviet Union in another light of using the case study of “Magnetic
Mountain City” to explain and argue how the creation of Stalinism would come to be known.
Stephen Kotkin’s book is about the factory production of iron and how it became a basis
of a whole city that provided the greatest insight of Stalinism throughout the book. The author
sees Stalinism as a civilization “a new society- manifest in property relations, social structure,
organization of economy, political practice and language” (p.2). Magnetic Mountain argues that
the underlying theme of the Soviet Union is to rise above capitalism and totally transform human
continuation. The book uses facts which emphasis on the iron industry, but also the construction
of the factory, housing issues, and daily life that individuals dealt with living in this industrial
city. The narrative of the book is a pro-Stalinist approach that discusses both the creative energy
of Stalinism, but also shows the destructive, harsh character of Stalinism and its economic,
political, and social effects. Although Kotkin does not use words such as harshness or brutality,
he still manages to paint a picture of the conditions of the individuals. Stephen Kotkin’s main
argument is that Stalinism offered itself for enlightenment, but also that socialism will be based
on the rejection of capitalism by using the ideology that Marxism- Leninism was the backbone of
the Bolshevik venture.
2
While reading this long, convincing monogram about Magnitogorsk one can be
persuaded into the different arguments in which Stephen Kotkin presents. With a convincing
argument Kotkin uses facts that provide the argument with enough validity to hold the argument
throughout the book. The quality of writing and documentation is excellent and it is well
organized, and broken into two sections. The chapters are easy to understand, and the book
offered a new viewpoint on Stalinism throughout the Soviet Union. Although somewhat tedious
at times, especially in the case of the 300 pages of footnotes at the end, the case study provided
ample background, and new historical understanding of not only the construction of the industry,
but the effects on daily life, housing issues, economics and the political aspects of the time. One
critique of the book is the inability of Kotkin to present an alternative explanation of the Great
Purges. Although he discusses the purges in the latter half of the book, Kotkin poorly explains
why the Purges took place except for Party Backlash. The monogram is a useful tool in learning
about Stalinism and also the history of the industrial city.
As discussed earlier, Stephen Kotkin expressed a different rise to power of Stalinism then
previous historians. Although he is somewhat true in his expression of Sheila Fitzpatrick and
Moshe Lewin, his narrative seems quite harsh of other individuals’ viewpoints. Kotkin does not
represent the Russian Revolution as a “cultural revolution” or a “quicksand society” like
Fitzpatrick and Lewin, but expresses the rise of Stalinism as a new civilization on the heals of
creativity and enlightenment. Not only does Kotkin inform readers of the differences in the
revisionist and himself, but gives another reassurance of his research by critiquing the early
analysts of Stalinism. Much like Fitzpatrick and Lewin, but in another category, Kotkin deviates
away from the traditional totalitarian school. On that note though, Kotkin, does expresses the
terror and harshness of the Bolshevik Party in a different way, but does not go as far as Hannah
3
Ardent and Leon Trotsky in the formation of the masses. The author also argues Trosky’s
approach to Stalinism in the aspect of the workers at the industrial city helped push the
revolution forward. Kotkin creates a new understanding of Stalinism, examining the ideological
viewpoints of the Soviet Union and using Marxism-Leninism as the key role in the Bolshevik
Party. Through this different form of examining the rise of Stalinism, all three schools of thought
produce possibilities that connect in some form with one another.
Stephen Kotkin’s research is thoroughly done and the monograph provides a clear and
precise argument. Kotkin supports his reasoning with an selection of sources from newspapers,
official records, and personal accounts. Although the author can be tedious and boring at some
aspects, his argument is clearly established by using an excellent case study of the Magnetic
Mountain City. Kotkin does a fantastic job of blending both schools of thought while
maintaining his own viewpoint of the Marxism- Leninism ideology through the Bolshevik point
of view. Although tiresome, the monogram was insightful on the rise of Stalinism and also
produced concrete evidence in the form of a case study on the social, cultural, political, and
economic growth of the industrial city called Magnetic Mountain.