Historian
Michel Heller asserted that the term was coined in the introduction of a 1974 monograph "" ("Soviet People") to describe the next level of evolution of humanity, where the USSR becomes the "kingdom of freedom", the birthplace of "a new, higher type of
Homo sapiens –
Homo sovieticus". According to the English Slavist
Frank Ellis, a former lecturer at the
University of Leeds, the constant attacks on reason, common sense and the rules of decency both distort and cripple both personality and intellect, and abolish the boundary between truth and falsehood. As a result, a
Homo sovieticus, full of fear and devoid of intellectual initiative, is formed, which is "a mouthpiece for
Party ideas and slogans, it is not so much a human being as a vessel that is filled and emptied at the direction of the Party". In their articles and lectures, the sociologist
Yuri Levada and members of his group
Levada Center attributed the following to the typical negative features of
Homo sovieticus: • indifference to the quality of their work; • theft from workplaces; • lack of initiative and avoidance of any personal responsibility; • understated ambitions; • uncomplaining submission to any actions of the authorities, adaptability; • willingness to carry out any, even immoral orders; • propensity to drink; • suspicion; • guile. In a number of his works, Levada described the negative personal qualities inherent in the Soviet man and, summing up many years of research, expressed confidence that the Soviet man as a type of personality did not disappear with the
collapse of the USSR, but continues to exist in modern Russia and be reproduced in new generations. Moreover, according to the scientist, cynicism and an increase in the level of aggression were added to such negative features as social hypocrisy, paternalism, suspicion and isolationism. According to Levada, these negative changes were again the result of restrictions on public freedoms, as well as distorted economic and moral incentives introduced by the new Russian authorities. As one of the surveys of the study showed, by 2004, the number of people who believe that Russians are no different from residents of other countries has significantly decreased and the number of those who consider Russia a "besieged fortress" surrounded by enemies has increased. According to the Russian scholar-educator Nikolay Nikandrov, the expression
Homo sovieticus is an insulting name invented by the critics of Soviet power for the "new man" mentioned as part of the new anthropological construct whose development was declared in the
Soviet Union ("Soviet people"). The contemporary American and Russian sociologist and
social anthropologist Alexei Yurchak believed that the constant reference to the expression
Homo sovieticus in Western academic and publicist discourse manifested assumptions that socialism was "bad", "amoral" or "imposed", expressing ideas about the existence of socialism as such in the Soviet Union and, accordingly, about the inevitable collapse of the Soviet Union. According to philosopher Artem Magun, the disappointment of a group of Russian intellectuals including Zinovyev and Levada in the Soviet project had extremely negative consequences in the 1970s: elitism in the Soviet
intelligentsia and the emergence of an anti-national and anti-populist pathos ("we are heavenly men, we think, but there is gloom and some anthropological degenerates around"). Despite the intellectuals' hypothetical affiliation with the
Homo sovieticus, this approach was just a pretense, Magun concluded. Magun concludes that the hostility of the intelligentsia towards the people was the cause of its subsequent (in the 1990s) betrayal, which in turn led to the counter-attack of "
Putinist populism". According to the British weekly
The Economist, which devoted a large article to the concept of
Homo sovieticus in 2011, after the fall of communism in 1991, both in Russia and in the West, there was hope that Western moral values would take root in Russia, and the country would eventually become one of the developed countries of the world. But, according to journalists, this point of view did not take into account the degree of destruction of the Russian economy, the magnitude of mental exhaustion of people and the depth of moral decay after 70 years of Soviet power. No one had any idea what type of state would replace the USSR and what it meant to "be Russian". == See also ==