Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-fbnjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T08:17:44.406Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Assembling Fordizm: The Production of Automobiles, Americans, and Bolsheviks in Detroit and Early Soviet Russia

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 April 2014

David E. Greenstein
David E. Greenstein*
Affiliation:
Department of History, University of Illinois, Urbana–Champaign
*
greenstn@illinois.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The expansion of the Ford Motor Company into Soviet Russia has been understood as part of a unidirectional spread of American economic power and cultural forms abroad following the First World War. This essay looks beyond the automobiles and manufacturing methods sent from Ford facilities in Detroit to the emerging Soviet automobile industry to examine multidirectional migrations of workers between Russia and the United States that underlay but sometimes collided with Ford's system. Workers, managers, engineers, and cultural, technical, and disciplinary knowledge moved back and forth between factories in Soviet Russia and the United States. Efforts to define, track, and shape workers in both countries as Americans, Russians, or Bolsheviks were integral to the construction of the products and methods that Ford sold. But many workers fell in between and contested these classifications and they often defied company attempts to create an efficient and homogeneous American workforce. In Russia, too, more than Soviet and American automobiles were produced: people and ideas were created that crossed and blurred boundaries between “American” and “Soviet.” There, “Fordizm” became a popular watchword among Soviet commentators and workers as a near-synonym for industrialization, mass production, and efficiency. Many saw it as a potentially valuable component of a new socialist world. These multidirectional movements, recorded in Ford Motor Company archives and related documents, suggest that rather than separate and alternative projects, Ford's burgeoning system to transform manufacturing and workers' lives in Detroit was linked to the Soviet revolutionary project to recreate life and work.

Type
Research Article
Information
Comparative Studies in Society and History , Volume 56 , Issue 2 , April 2014 , pp. 259 - 289
Copyright
Copyright © Society for the Comparative Study of Society and History 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Maurice Hindus, “Henry Ford Conquers Russia,” Outlook 146 (29 June 1927): 280–83. Ball, Alan M., Imagining America: Influence and Images in Twentieth-Century Russia (Lanham, Md.: Rowman & Littlefield, 2003)Google Scholar, 24.

2 Hanson, Ole, Americanism versus Bolshevism (New York: Doubleday, 1920)Google Scholar; Ball, Imagining America.

3 Boris Shpotov, “Ford in Russia, from 1909 to World War II,” and Cohen, Yves, “The Soviet Fordson: Between the Politics of Stalin and the Philosophy of Ford, 1924–1932,” both in Bonin, Hubert, Lung, Yannick, and Tolliday, Steven, eds., Ford: The European History, vol. 2 (Paris: Editions P.L.A.G.E., 2003), 513, 524, 533–34Google Scholar. Siegelbaum, Lewis H., Cars for Comrades: The Life of the Soviet Automobile (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2008)Google Scholar, 2.

4 Stalin and Trotsky, respectively, quoted in Rogger, Hans, “Amerikanizm and the Economic Development of Russia,” Comparative Studies in Society and History 23, 3 (1981): 382–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

5 McFadden, David W., Alternative Paths: Soviets and Americans, 1917–1920 (New York: Oxford University Press, 1993)Google Scholar; Westad, Odd Arne, The Global Cold War: Third World Interventions and the Making of Our Times (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2007)Google Scholar, chs. 1 and 2; Engerman, David, “Ideology and the Origins of the Cold War, 1917–1962,” in Leffler, Melvyn and Westad, Odd Arne, eds., Cambridge History of the Cold War, Volume 1: Origins (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2010).Google Scholar

6 This argument draws on recent scholarship that has interrogated the primacy of the nation in history by focusing on movements and connections beyond and between the territorial limits of nation-states. See for example, Bender, Thomas, La Pietra Report (Bloomington, Ind.: Organization of American Historians, 2000)Google Scholar; Bender, Thomas, ed., Rethinking American History in a Global Age (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar. As summarized in a recent forum, “The claim of transnational methods is not simply that historical processes are made in different places but that they are constructed in the movement between places, sites, and regions”; Hofmeyr, Isabel, in “AHR Conversation: On Transnational History,” American Historical Review 111, 5 (2006): 1441–64Google Scholar, here 1444. See also Briggs, Laura, McCormick, Gladys, and Way, J. T., “Transnationalism: A Category of Analysis,” American Quarterly 60 (Sept. 2008): 625–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

7 For example, Lewis Siegelbaum has written, “The Detroit of the Soviet imagination had little to do with the actual city in Michigan” (Cars for Comrades, 3). See also Ball, Imagining America, ch. 1.

8 I use “automobile” in this essay to refer broadly to the range of motor vehicles that the Ford Motor Company produced including tractors, which comprised the bulk of the vehicles sold to the Soviet Union in the 1920s. I use “products” to denote material goods like equipment, parts, and vehicles, as well as the technical knowledge and industrial methods that the Ford Company sold.

9 Nevins, Allan and Hill, Frank E., Ford: Expansion and Challenge, 1915–1933 (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1953)Google Scholar, 673; Wilkins, Mira and Hill, Frank E., American Business Abroad: Ford on Six Continents (Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1964)Google Scholar; Barbara Kugel, The Export of American Technology to the Soviet Union, 1918–1933 including the Ford Motor Company-Soviet Government Relationship, (MA thesis, Wayne State University, 1956). For other industries, see Carstensen, Fred V., American Enterprise in Foreign Markets: Studies of Singer and International Harvester in Imperial Russia (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1984)Google Scholar; Sutton, Antony C., Western Technology and Soviet Economic Development (Stanford: Hoover Institution, 1968)Google Scholar. For a recent history that frames this interaction as a temporary effort “in a decidedly backward country,” see Brinkley, Douglas, Wheels for the World: Henry Ford, His Company, and a Century of Progress, 1903–2003 (New York: Viking, 2003)Google Scholar, 374; For a perspective grounded in Soviet history that also emphasizes the USSR's “underdeveloped” industry and reliance on foreign corporations, see Schultz, Kurt S., “Building the ‘Soviet Detroit’: The Construction of the Nizhnii-Novgorod Automobile Factory, 1927–1932,” Slavic Review 49, 2 (Summer 1990): 200–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For an example from a Russian historian, see Shpotov, Boris, “The Case of US Companies in Russia-USSR: Ford in 1920s–1930s,” in Bonin, Hubert and de Goey, Ferry, eds., American Firms in Europe: Strategy, Identity, Perception and Performance, 1880–1980 (Geneve: Libraire Droz S.A., 2009)Google Scholar. A Russian history that examines multidirectional movements of workers is Zhuravlev, Sergei's “‘Little People’ and ‘Big History’: Foreigners at the Moscow Electric Factory and Soviet Society, 1920s–1930s,” Bliss, Liv, trans., Russian Studies in History 44, 1 (Summer 2005), 10–86.Google Scholar

10 For histories of the movement of American businesses efforts to Europe that describe a unidirectional spread of American products and cultural forms see, for example, Rosenberg, Emily S., Spreading the American Dream: American Economic and Cultural Expansion, 1890–1945 (New York: Hill and Wang, 1982)Google Scholar; and more recently, De Grazia, Victoria, Irresistible Empire: America's Advance through Twentieth-Century Europe (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2005).Google Scholar

11 Rydell, Robert W. and Kroes, Rob, Buffalo Bill in Bologna: The Americanization of the World, 1869–1922 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2005), 5–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

12 For example, Hoganson, Kristin L., Consumers' Imperium: The Global Production of American Domesticity, 1865–1920 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2007).Google Scholar

13 In arguing this, I intend to link two kinds of “Americanization” that have remained separate in the historiography of the United States. The term has been applied separately to the spread of American culture and products abroad, and to the assimilation of immigrants. For a critique of this bifurcation see Bonin, Hubert and de Goey, Ferry, “American Companies in Europe: Issues and Perspectives,” in Bonin, H. and de Goey, F., eds., American Firms in Europe: Strategy, Identity, Perception and Performance, 1880–1980 (Geneve: Libraire Droz S.A., 2009).Google Scholar For an argument that links the export of American consumer goods with the import of foreign workers, see Jacobson, Matthew Frye, Barbarian Virtues: The United States Encounters Foreign Peoples at Home and Abroad, 1876–1917 (New York: Hill and Wang, 2000).Google Scholar

14 For one proposal “that people, ideas, and institutions do not have clear national identities,” see Thelen, David, “Of Audiences, Borderlands, and Comparisons: Toward the Internationalization of American History” Journal of American History 79, 2 (Sept. 1992): 432–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar, here 436. Thelen suggests, “Instead of assuming that something was distinctively American, we might assume that elements of it began or ended somewhere else.”

15 Siegelbaum, Cars for Comrades, 5. For another analysis of the result of such encounters as a “peculiar hybrid,” see Kurt S. Schultz, The American Factor in Soviet Industrialization: Fordism and the First Five-Year Plan, 1928–1932 (PhD diss., Ohio State University, 1992), 136.

16 Siegelbaum describes this problem of measuring Soviet industry and industrial products against contemporary American industry as “the creeping imperialism of Western standards”; Cars for Comrades, 8.

17 Recently scholars of the Soviet Union have employed a comparative perspective to argue that Soviet socialism can be understood as an alternative form of European projects of modernity. See, for example, Hoffmann, David L., “European Modernity and Soviet Socialism,” in Hoffmann, David L. and Kotsonis, Yanni, eds., Russian Modernity: Politics, Knowledge, Practices (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For one proposal that we should understand these projects instead as part of “entangled modernities” through a transnational approach, see David-Fox, Michael, “Multiple Modernities vs. Neo-Traditionalism: On Recent Debates in Russian and Soviet History,” Jahrbücher für Geschichte Osteuropas 55, 4 (2006): 549–55Google Scholar. For a discussion of the earlier “convergence model” of scholarship on Soviet industrialization, which emphasized similarities with the West, see Lewis Siegelbaum and Ronald Suny, “Conceptualizing the Command Economy: Western Historians on Soviet Industrialization,” in Rosenberg, William and Siegelbaum, Lewis, eds., Social Dimensions of Soviet Industrialization (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1993).Google Scholar

18 Nolan, Mary, Visions of Modernity: American Business and the Modernization of Germany (New York: Oxford University Press, 1994)Google Scholar, 30.

19 Hanson, Americanism versus Bolshevism, 283.

20 Ford Motor Company, “Uncle Sam and the Bolsheviki-I.W.W. Rat” (ca. 1919), in Treasures III—Social Issues in American Film 1900–1934, Program 3: Toil and Tyranny. San Francisco: National Film Preservation Foundation, 2007.

21 Benson Ford Research Center, The Henry Ford, Dearborn, Michigan (hereafter “BFRC”), accession 575, box 29, Ford Motor Company [FMC] #128—Espionage—Operative 15 Reports, 1 Oct. 1919.

22 “Ford Plant Delegate to Detroit ‘Soviet’ Ordered Deported for Advocating Violence,” New York Times, 13 May 1922, in BFRC, accession 940, box 17, FMC-Labor-Radicals.

23 Brinkley, Wheels for the World, 249.

24 Correspondence and contracts related to the sale are located in BFRC, accession 49, box 1, Amtorg Trading Corp., 1946 (also 1919–1920).

25 The Ford Company also appears to have sent one representative to Russia; see “Departmental Communication, Jan 2nd 1919,” in BFRC, accession 62—Henry Ford Office Subject and Name File 1919, box 109, Folder—Russia.

26 Wilkins and Hill, American Business Abroad, 209; S. Nuorteva to Mr. Henry Ford, 21 Apr. 1919, BFRC, accession 62, box 109, Henry Ford Office Subject and Name File 1919, Folder—Russia; see also McFadden, Alternative Paths, 280.

27 Meyer, Stephen, The Five Dollar Day: Labor Management and Social Control in the Ford Motor Company, 1908–1921 (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1981)Google Scholar, 6, 123. While notions of mass production and the assembly line that came to be recognized as hallmarks of Ford's system were not new, when used in conjunction and implemented systematically they produced fundamental transformation in work expectations and practices (see ibid., 10–11).

28 Ibid., 123, 157–58.

29 Samuel Marquis quoted in Leonard, Jonathan, The Tragedy of Henry Ford (New York: Putnam, 1932)Google Scholar, 120.

30 Facts from Ford (Detroit: Ford Motor Company, 1920)Google Scholar, 3, in BFRC accession 951—Ford Non-Serial Imprints, box: Fa-Few.

31 BRFC, accession 940, box 17, FMC—Labor—Radicals—Sociological Department, “Human Interest Story, Number Nine.”

32 Ford, Henry, “Saying #7,” in 365 of Henry Ford's Sayings (New York: League-for-a-Living, 1923).Google Scholar

33 Meyer, Five Dollar Day, 41, 65, 166.

34 James J. Flink, “Ford, Henry,” American National Biography Online, at: http://www.anb.org/articles/10/10-00578.html (accessed 5 Dec. 2013).

35 Bonosky, Phillip, Brother Bill Mckie: Building the Union at Ford (New York: International Publishers, 1953)Google Scholar, 13.

36 Nolan, Visions of Modernity, 30.

37 Mayakovsky, Vladimir, My Discovery of America, Cornwell, Neil, trans. (London: Hesperus Press, 2005 [1926])Google Scholar, 97, 99.

38 Norwood, Stephen H., Strikebreaking and Intimidation: Mercenaries and Masculinity in Twentieth-Century America (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2002), 171–76Google Scholar; Meyer, Five Dollar Day, 6–7, 168, 170.

39 Ford, 365 of Henry Ford's Sayings, 24.

40 BFRC, accession 1870, box 1, Report of the Ford Delegation to Russia, 104–6; BRFC, accession 940, box 17, FMC—Labor—Radicals—Sociological Department, “Human Interest Story, Number Nine.”

41 BFRC, accession 1870, box 1, Report of the Ford Delegation to Russia, 38. Americans working in Soviet factories during the time of the Five-Year Plan often echoed such critiques, also without acknowledging ways that “control over the workmen” was never complete or uncontested in the United States. For examples, see Schultz, American Factor.

42 BFRC, accession 532, box 1, Folder—Amtorg Trading Corp. Correspondence General 1929–1932, 1944, 1 of 2. Schultz, “Building the ‘Soviet Detroit.’”

43 Lewis Kahn, Albert Kahn Inc. Architects and Engineers to Russell Gnau, Ford Motor Company, BFRC, accession 532, box 1, Folder—Amtorg Trading Corp. Correspondence General 1929–1932, 1944, 1 of 2.

44 Shpotov, “The Case of US Companies in Russia-USSR,” in American Firms in Europe, 442.

45 Ford, 365 of Henry Ford's Sayings, 24.

46 Siegelbaum, Cars for Comrades, 3.

47 Ford, Henry, “Machinery, the New Messiah,” Forum, 79, 3 (Mar. 1928): 359–64Google Scholar, here 359; Sward, Keith, The Legend of Henry Ford (New York: Rinehart, 1948)Google Scholar, viv; Nye, David E., Henry Ford, Ignorant Idealist (Port Washington, N.Y.: Kennikat Press, 1979)Google Scholar, 71; Grandin, Greg, Fordlandia: The Rise and Fall of Henry Ford's Forgotten Jungle City (New York: Picador, 2009), 41–42.Google Scholar

48 Nye, Henry Ford, Ignorant Idealist, 71.

49 Grandin, Fordlandia, 45.

50 Nevins and Hill, Ford: Expansion and Challenge, 685.

51 “Soviet Safety,” Ford News 6, 5 (1 Jan. 1926): 6.

52 Fitzgerald, Deborah, “Collectivization and Industrialization: Learning from the Soviets,” in Every Farm a Factory: The Industrial Ideal in American Agriculture (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2003).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

53 Nolan, Visions of Modernity, 8, 26; Siegelbaum, Cars for Comrades, 2; Rogger, “Amerikanizm and the Economic Development of Russia.”

54 Mayakovsky, My Discovery of America, 95–96.

55 Siegelbaum, Cars for Comrades, 2.

56 Bailes, Kendall E., Technology and Society under Lenin and Stalin: Origins of the Soviet Technical Intelligentsia, 1917–1941 (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1978)Google Scholar, 50; Beissinger, Mark R., Scientific Management, Socialist Discipline, and Soviet Power (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1988), 20–21Google Scholar, 34–35; Maier, Charles S., “Between Taylorism and Technocracy: European Ideologies and the Vision of Industrial Productivity,” Journal of Contemporary History 5, 2 (1970): 27–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

57 On the idea that Soviet consumer culture would be a central aspect of building socialism see, for example, Hilton, Marjorie L., “Retailing the Revolution: The State Department Store (GUM) and Soviet Society in the 1920s,” Journal of Social History 37, 4 (2004): 939–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Gronow, Jukka, Caviar with Champagne: Common Luxury and the Ideals of the Good Life in Stalin's Russia (Oxford: Berg, 2003).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

58 Schultz, American Factor, 2, see also 49–50, 134, 216.

59 Counts, George S., A Ford Crosses Soviet Russia (Boston: Stratford Company, 1930)Google Scholar, 192. On American Russian experts who discussed the efficacy of American methods of modernization for Russia, see Engerman, David C., Modernization from the Other Shore: American Intellectuals and the Romance of Russian Development (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2003).Google Scholar

60 Schultz, American Factor, 54; Stites, Richard, Revolutionary Dreams: Utopian Vision and Experimental Life in the Russian Revolution (New York: Oxford University Press, 1989), 49, 147–48Google Scholar; Buck-Morss, Susan, Dreamworld and Catastrophe: The Passing of Mass Utopia in East and West (Boston: MIT Press, 2002)Google Scholar, 110. For some peasants' reactions to Ford, see Hindus, Maurice, Broken Earth (New York: International Publishers), 1926.Google Scholar

61 Bailes, Kendalle E., “The American Connection: Ideology and the Transfer of American Technology to the Soviet Union, 1917–1941,” Comparative Studies in Society and History 23: 3 (1981): 421–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar, here 441; Stites, Revolutionary Dreams, 147.

62 Mayakovsky, My Discovery of America, 95–96; Nolan, Visions of Modernity, 12; Maier, “Between Taylorism and Technocracy,” 60.

63 Gastev, A., “Fordizm,” Bol'shaya sovetskaya entsiklopediya (Moscow: Sovetskaya Entsiklopediya, 1933), 131–35.Google Scholar

64 “Shantazh ne udalsya,” Za industrializatsiiu, 23 May 1931, quoted in Schultz, American Factor, 198.

65 K. Rustavelli, “Ne dlia togo my tratim valiutu, chtoby inostrannye spetsialisty sideli slozha ruki, usilit' internatsional'noe vospitanie na zavodah,” 22 Aug. 1930, Za industrializatsiiu. See also Schultz, American Factor, 20, 147; Bailes, “American Connection,” 441–42.

66 Brooks, Jeffrey, “The Press and Its Message: Images of America in the 1920s and 1930s,” in Fitzpatrick, Sheila, Rabinowitch, Alexander, and Sites, Richard, eds., Russia in the Era of NEP: Explorations in Soviet Society and Culture (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1991)Google Scholar, 241. On the idea of creating “new men” who would be called “Russian Americans,” see also Bailes, “American Connection,” 427.

67 Schultz, American Factor, 55.

68 BFRC, accession 1870, box 1, Report of the Ford Delegation to Russia, 104–6; BFRC, accession 1870, box 1; Henry Schram to Mr. Falland, 30 June 1932, BFRC, accession 390, box 87.

69 See, for example, Kelly, Catriona, “The Education of the Will: Advice Literature, Zakal, and Manliness in Early Twentieth-Century Russia,” in Clements, Barbara Evans, Friedman, Rebecca, and Healey, Dan, eds., Russian Masculinities in History and Culture (New York: Palgrave, 2002).Google Scholar

70 Gastev, “Fordizm”; Schultz, American Factor, 2, 49–50, 134, 216; Stites, Revolutionary Dreams, 154.

71 Bailes, “American Connection,” 437.

72 For the contract, see BFRC accession 531, box 1, Amtorg Trading Corp Agreements General 1929–1935. See also Schultz, American Factor, 170.

73 For student records see BFRC, accession 774, Henry Ford Trade School Student Records Series [1919–1927], Foreign Student Records.

74 “Frank Bennet Oral Reminiscences,” 133, BFRC accession 65, box 5 Folder—Bennet, Frank—Final.

75 Koenker, Diane P., “Factory Tales: Narratives of Industrial Relations in the Transition to NEP,” Russian Review 55 (July 1996): 384–411, here 386–88, 400CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Buck-Morss, Dreamworld and Catastrophe, 104–7.

76 The Ford Man was the name of one of Ford's employee periodicals; Stites, Revolutionary Dreams, 153.

77 Pirani, Simon, The Russian Revolution in Retreat, 1920–24: Soviet Workers and the New Communist Elite (New York: Routledge, 2008), 4, 209–10Google Scholar; Koenker, Diane P., Republic of Labor: Russian Printers and Soviet Socialism, 1918–1930 (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2005), 143–73.Google Scholar

78 Meyer, Five Dollar Day, 170.

79 Facts from Ford, on pages 56, 58, 60 are photographs of a representative worker of each of the sixty nationalities, in BFRC accession 951—Ford Non-Serial Imprints, box: Fa-Few.

80 Meyer, Five Dollar Day, 77.

81 “Educational Statistics. Home Plant,” 12 Jan. 1917, BFRC, accession 572, box 27, Folder—#12.5, Employee Morale, Living Conditions, etc.

82 Ibid. See also the section of “Educational Statistics” on Religion, which lists all the “Russians” as practicing various varieties of Christianity with no Jews.

83 BFRC, accession 572, box 29, Folder—FMC—#128-Espionage-Operative 15 Reports, “July 16th 1919.” When quoting from these reports I have retained misspellings and alternative spellings such as “Bolshevic.”

84 Operative 15 Reports, “July 15, 1919,” and “July 23, 1919,” “Box Factory, 3 Shift, Nov 24–Dec 8 1919.”

85 Operative 15 Reports, “September 5, 1919,” and “July 24, 1919.”

86 Operative 15 Reports, “April 7, 1920.”

87 Operative 15 Reports, “July 25, 1919,” and “April 7, 1920.”

88 Operative 15 Reports, “October 1 1919.” Russian-American Ford workers were not alone in choosing to migrate back to Russia. According to one estimate, more than half of the Russian immigrants who came to the United States returned to Russia between 1908 and 1923; Wyman, Mark, Round-Trip to America: The Immigrants Return to Europe, 1880–1930 (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1993)Google Scholar, 11. These statistics are also plagued with problems to do with shifting boundaries of various national and ethnic groups of the Russian Empire and Soviet Union, and in separating out “Hebrew” migrants.

89 Mayakovsky, My Discovery of America, 93.

90 Siegelbaum, Cars for Comrades, 5, 13.

91 BFRC, accession 1870, box 1, Report of the Ford Delegation to Russia, 50.

92 BFRC, accession 65, box 66, Oral Histories—Sorensen—“Amtorg” Final, 7. See also Sorensen, Charles, My Forty Years with Ford (Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1956)Google Scholar, 197.

93 A parallel history involves return-émigrés—those who after the revolution left Russia to live and work in the United States but decided to go back to the Soviet Union after experiencing life in America. For an analysis of Soviet press accounts of these migrants, see Brooks, “The Press and Its Message,” in Russia in the Era of NEP, 238.

94 Pirani, 107–9. In some cases, questions about nationality and ideology, and determinations of citizenship status caused difficulties for individuals who went to the Soviet Union from the United States to work in Soviet factories but then wanted to leave by the 1930s. For some personal accounts see Tzouliadis, Tim, The Forsaken: An American Tragedy in Stalin's Russia (New York: Penguin Press, 2008)Google Scholar; and Herman, Victor, Coming Out of the Ice: An Unexpected Life (New York: Harcourt Brace, 1979).Google Scholar

95 Ware later worked for the Agricultural Adjustment Administration and was also the namesake of the “Ware Group” that allegedly organized U.S. government employees to aid in Soviet intelligence gathering. See Harris, Lement, Harold M. Ware (1890–1935): Agricultural Pioneer, U.S.A. and U.S.S.R. (New York: American Institute for Marxist Studies, 1978)Google Scholar; and My Tale of Two Worlds (New York: International Publishers, 1986)Google Scholar; Lowell K. Dyson, “Ware, Harold,” in American National Biography Online, at: http://www.anb.org/articles/15/15-00784.html. For an account of Ware's circulation between Soviet and American agricultural industries, see Fitzgerald, “Collectivization and Industrialization.”

96 Many other Americans who were not born in Russia also decided to migrate to the Soviet Union in the 1920s. According to one estimate, about twenty-two thousand people from the United States and Canada were admitted as immigrants between 1920 and 1925. Garb, Paula, They Came to Stay: North Americans in the U.S.S.R. (Moscow: Progress Publishers, 1987)Google Scholar, 27. For an example of a group of Americans who migrated to the Soviet Union during the 1920s to build a collective industrial colony, see Morray, J. P., Project Kuzbas: American Workers in Siberia, 1921–1926 (New York: International Publishers, 1983).Google Scholar

97 BFRC, accession 1870, box 1, Report of the Ford Delegation to Russia, 145–52.