Talk:New Soviet man

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In a Glossary -- Soviet Union within its "Federal Research Division / Country Studies / Area Handbook Series", the Library of Congress says

A theoretical goal of several Soviet regimes to transform the culturally, ethnically, and linguistically diverse peoples of the Soviet Union into a single Soviet people, behaving according to the ideology of Marxism-Leninism (q.v.).

The "Cold War Guide" probably lifted it from there, IMO. --Jerzy (t) 21:13, 2005 Apr 27 (UTC)

[edit] Where to find more

Yeah, I found the Library of Congress's link as well as tons of other useful stuff on and about the Soviet Union, but I am really interested to find out more about this New Soviet Man. Anyone has ideas about this or suggestion on where to look for more information/details? Thanks for your help.

There are hardly any first-hand documents about the building of the New Soviet man, but you can try to find propaganda meterials and old university textbooks on Marxism-Leninism. Samnikal 07:02, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Does anyone know where I can find a copy of Bernard Bykhovsky's "The New Man in the Making" (Moscow: Novosti Press Agency Publishing House), cited at the end of this article? I haven't been able to find a trace of it. Ukasiac 21:11, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Suggested merge

Homo sovieticus should be merged here to provide the sourcing/criticism this article lacks. --Leflyman^Talk 03:19, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

• no merge: nothing in common. New Soviet man is Soviet ideal. Homo Sovieticus is a slur. What is missing is an article, kind of Psychology of Soviet people or something, which in a neutral way describes a highly controversial subject. `'mikka 15:41, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

• Yes, they have everything in common: "Homo Sovieticus" is a satirical criticism of the ideal of "New Soviet Man" -- as noted in the article itself, "In many ways it meant the opposite of the New Soviet man..." and is clear from the BBC article, Thorny legacy of 'Soviet Man'. New Soviet Man doesn't even have a single reference. A general "Psychology of Soviet people" article would be a whole 'nother thing -- and likely Original Research. There's no precedent in Category:Social_sciences for such an article.--Leflyman^Talk 17:35, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
  • This criticism is one mouse click away. No reason to have clearly separable topics in one article. `'mikka 01:23, 19 May 2007 (UTC)