This is the second time I’ve read “The Dying Russians” for a class at Williams. The first time was last semester in a course on Russian politics. While I didn’t think it was perfect, I was overall convinced by her argument. However, on this reading, I cannot say the same. When examining her methodology, it becomes difficult to defend any of her conclusions. She attempts to use a historical approach to strengthen her cultural explanation for the crisis. While this would normally be a sound strategy, she takes a lot of liberalities in her analysis of the historical evidence. For example, she writes, “Yes, Russians have lived through severe economic upheaval, but there are is no indication that economic shock in a modern society leads quickly, or at all, to increased mortality – the Great Depression, for example, did not.” This quote seems to completely discount the utter chaos Russia underwent after the collapse of the Soviet Union.\u00a0Earlier in the article, she does mention the horrors of shock therapy. However, she downplays the fact that many Russians completely lost their health care benefits as their country transitioned from communism to capitalism. In addition, the Russian state suffered a complete breakdown as citizens were forced to rely on organized crime syndicates for protection, rather than the police. This led to a massive increase in the murder rate. I think Gessen is onto something with her cultural explanation for Russian birthrates but her article is weakened by her selective reading of Russian history. Scientific studies must present all evidence.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
This is the second time I’ve read “The Dying Russians” for a class at Williams. The first time was last semester in a course on Russian politics. While I didn’t think it was perfect, I was overall convinced by her … Continue reading