Aqil Shah is a PhD candidate in the Department of Political Science at Columbia University.  While at CDDRL, he will write his dissertation entitled "Controlling Coercion:  The Military and Politics in Pakistan and India."  His broad research interests include comparative democratization, civil-military relations, religion and politics and South Asian politics with a focus on Pakistan. His work has appeared in the Journal of Democracy and edited volumes.  

This event is sponsored by the Forum on Contemporary Europe, Center for European Studies, and Center for Russian, Eastern European and Eurasian Studies.

Event Summary:

Professor Koll's presentation describes the "dekulakization" process in Estonia during the 1940s as a systematic class struggle campaign aimed at breaking up the cohesion of the perceived ruling rural bourgeoisie, so as to make Soviet influence in the region easier. Tools of the campaign included taxation, forced reduction in farm size, redistribution of livestock and equipment, political persecution, severe social stigmatization, and in some cases deportation to Siberia. The difficulty in identifying "kulaks" from an egalitarian countryside full of similarly small farms was addressed by enlisting locals to identify, to a surprising extent, perceived kulak members of their own communities. These were often neighbors, and sometimes family. Still, there remained a hazy line between perpetrators and victims, as Koll illustrates with a case study toward the end of her talk. Koll also discusses the role of German occupation during the early 1940s, and the German POW camps that followed, in the dekulakization process. In her concluding comments, Professor Koll notes the ambiguous nature of a campaign aimed at dividing a population across invisible lines, which nonetheless left no option for passive observation and made everyone choose a side. Koll notes that the effects of class warfare persist to this day among the rural Estonian population, in the pervasiveness of alcoholism and strong distrust between neighbors.

A discussion session following the presentation raised such issues as how locals came to be in the position of identifying kulaks; whether there were regional variations in deportation rates; what aspects of the Estonian environment facilitated dekulakization; where the Estonian case falls on a continuum of collectivization; and what the success rates was of appeals by families accused of being kulaks.

In the context of authoritarian states the internet has always been viewed as an unambiguous force for good, allowing citizens of such states to mobilise around particular political and social issues, and gain access to previously banned materials. However, many authoritarian governments are now actively exploiting cyberspace for their own purposes; some of them appear to be succeeding in subverting the internet's democratising potential. Have we overestimated the internet's ability to bring democratic change and underestimated? Drawing on numerous recent examples from Russia, China, and Iran, the talk will illustrate the darker side the use of social media in these countries.

Evgeny Morozov is a leading thinker and commentator on the political implications of the Internet. He is a contributing editor to Foreign Policy and runs the magazine's influential and widely-quoted "Net Effect" blog about the Internet's impact on global politics (neteffect.foreignpolicy.com). Morozov is currently a Yahoo! fellow at Georgetown University's E.A. Walsh School of Foreign Service. Prior to his appointment to Georgetown, he was a fellow at George Soros's Open Society Institute, where he remains on the board of the Information Program (one of the leading and most experimental funders for technology projects that have an impact on open society and human rights). Before moving to the US, Morozov was based in Berlin and Prague, where he was Director of New Media at Transitions Online.

• Morozov, Evgeny. "Texting Toward Utopia. Does the Internet spread democracy?" (via Boston Review)

• Morozov, Evgeny. "The Internet: A Room of Our Own?" (via Dissent magazine)

Formal venture capital investing in Silicon Valley has been underway for more than 50 years. It was in the Valley that the limited partnership format was first used for venture capital. Whereas, originally Silicon Valley VCs were mostly from a finance background, very early on individuals with operating experience formed or joined partnerships.

Perhaps most important was the tight linkages between the venture capitalists and the nearly continuous evolution of information technologies. The enormous returns from information technologies enabled Silicon Valley VCs to make very early investments in other technologies ranging from biotechnology to nanotechnology. These returns also encouraged high levels of risk-taking.

Through the use of a historical perspective, the concluding remarks will reflect upon the current dire straits for venture capital.

Martin Kenney is a Professor at the University of California, Davis, a Senior Project Director at the Berkeley Roundtable on the International Economy, as well as a fellow at the Center for Entrepreneurship at UC Davis. He has authored or edited five books and over 120 scholarly articles on the globalization of services, the history of venture capital, university-industry relations, and the development of Silicon Valley. His two recent edited books Understanding Silicon Valley and Locating Global Advantage (with Richard Florida) were published by Stanford University Press where he is the editor of a book series in innovation and globalization. Currently, he is preparing a book on the history and globalization of the venture capital industry.