How many legislature members there were who were not members of any party in the USA compared to the USSR during the Cold War and now?

  • 1
    Isn't the answer for the USSR by definition "0"? The legislature was elected by non-competitive elections. I can't find any evidence that membership in the communist party was a requirement to stand for election, but everything I know about the USSR indicates that there was no need to clarify that because it was obvious to all concerned.
    – MCW
    Commented Feb 19, 2013 at 18:36
  • 4
    @Mark C. Wallace Russian Wikipedia claims that in the Supreme Council of the USSR of 1937 below 1/5 of the members were non-partisan, in the Supreme Council of 1970 54% of the members were independent.
    – Anixx
    Commented Feb 19, 2013 at 18:38
  • 2
    I'm not aware of ANY member "of no party" in US Congress in practice (all the "independent" BS aside, since all of the putatively "independent" members are ex-members of some party and caucus and vote with one party majority of the time, making their "independence" a mere technicality).
    – DVK
    Commented Feb 19, 2013 at 18:51
  • 1
    @Anixx - being "not a partisan" != "not being a member of KPSS". Not every citizen of USSR was required (nor was) a KPSS member. But no citizen - never mind elected member of Sovet - would think/act/talk contrary to KPSS party line if they knew what was good for them. A more interesting historical question would be a simpler "were you allowed to be elected to Supreme Soviet if not a member of KPSS", IMHO.
    – DVK
    Commented Feb 19, 2013 at 18:56
  • 2
    @Mark C. Wallace no, the Wikipedia says they were not KPSS members (беспартийные, party-less).
    – Anixx
    Commented Feb 19, 2013 at 19:28

1 Answer 1


For the USA, I guess the information is reasonably googlable. But as for the USSR, I wish to point out that the answer is: 0, both substantively and formally.

(1) Substantively: Clearly, no one who was really opposed to the CPSU was allowed to come within a shout of any political office.

(2) Formally: The "independent" candidates were actually running as part of a "Communist and Party-less Bloc" (which pretty much covers all bases). So even if they were not card-carrying members of the CPSU they were elected to the Supreme Soviet on behalf of the CPSU. I couldn't find an English reference to the bloc, but here is a Russian one from the Big Soviet Encyclopedia itself.

EDIT: Here is a contemporary reference to the bloc: http://ufn.ru/ru/articles/1937/8/b/.

EDIT: The second source I gave is a contemporary, 1937, official propaganda press release about the elections. Curiously, it was published in a physics journal (and presumably, in other journals as well). The following passage is telling:

Быть депутатом Верховного Совета первого в мире социалистического государства , состоять в железной когорте партийных и непартийных большевиков , коим доверено руководство могучей , непобедимой социалистической державой , — почетное и ответственное дело . Величайшую ответственность перед народом , перед своими избирателями должен всегда чувствовать каждый депутат.

In English (my translation):

To be a member of the Supreme Council of the world's first socialist state, to be part of the iron cohort of Party and non-Party Bolsheviks, to whom entrusted the leadership of a powerful and invincible socialist power - is a matter of honor and responsibility. Every deputy should always feel a great responsibility to his electors.

So, the deputies formed an "iron cohort of Party and non-Party Bolsheviks". I think it proves beyond any doubt that the "independents" were just as beholden to the party as the formally party men.

UPDATE: I found a 1947 election poster for the "bloc".

UPDATE: More evidence: a booklet, published in 1954, titled "The Indestructible Bloc of the Communists and the Party-less". Published by the State Press for Political Literature.

  • 1
    I'd like to see more outside evidence also for this answer. I have no sympathies for the former USSR, but could still imagine that they reserved some (token) seats for representatives of certain minorities or certain sports celebrities, say. Also, the question seems to define "independence" merely as "not member of any party", which is (much) weaker than "really opposed to the CPSU". "Formally" independent candidates would also count by that definition (or "definition" :) BTW, I recently came across this deserving USSR biography.
    – Drux
    Commented Feb 20, 2013 at 23:03
  • 2
    If the USA information is googlable, I see no reason why not to include it here for comparison. I also interested to know why do you assert that the US independent candidates were independent substantively. Also my question was about party members, not members of particular blocks (because party members are subjects to party discipline).
    – Anixx
    Commented Feb 20, 2013 at 23:10
  • 1
    @Anixx - if you want USA info, I linked to relevant Google article in the comment to your question. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independent_(politician)#Congress
    – DVK
    Commented Feb 21, 2013 at 16:23
  • 1
    @Anixx - the block wasn't formal. It didn't make it less real.
    – DVK
    Commented Feb 21, 2013 at 16:24
  • 1
    @Anixx: Actually, come to think of it, I think my claim is valid with no qualification or modification. I claimed the existence of an electoral bloc and, imho, have proved its existence beyond any trace of doubt. The non-existence of a popular front doesn't matter in this regard. Commented Feb 22, 2013 at 14:20

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.