531 Book Reviews sees is a small group of defenseless women hemmed in by a large, armed regiment of Nazi soldiers on horseback, all of whom are male. It is a sobering photograph. But the caption reads: “Residents of the Molotschna Mennonite colony in southeast- ern Ukraine, including a cavalry Squadron of the Wafen-SS, celebrate a visit from Heinrich Himmler, 1942” (back fap). Though that adequately captures Goossen’s conclusions of Mennonite complicity in Nazi atrocities in Ukraine during World War II, at no point does he investigate who those women were in the photograph, and to what degree they might have felt compelled to “celebrate,” if “celebrate” they did. His own commentary on page 161 suggests that alternate narratives are entirely plausible. Yet for reasons unclear, Goossen declares that (some? all? many?) “Mennonite leaders had assisted Hitler’s empire building in Ukraine and Poland,” and that Ukraine’s Mennonites were a “tool of Nazi colonialism” (172). At no point does he engage any Russian language sources or the work of Viktor Klets, the leading Ukrainian historian of Mennonites during the Nazi occupation. Here and elsewhere, Goossen’s text reveals the dangers that arise in attempting to cover too vast a territory. The reader ofen is unsure how Goossen’s conclusions have been reached. Taken as a whole, Goossen has provided valuable insight into how select Mennonite progressive “leaders” in the German lands responded to German unifca- tion, and how they worked to transform their confession up to and afer World War I. It is to be hoped that Goossen will now dig deep into the German Mennonite experience, and investigate the people within those “collectivisms” whose voices, until now, have rarely been heard. Leonard G. Friesen Wilfrid Laurier University Fascism in Manchuria: The Soviet-China Encounter in the 1930s. By Susanne Hohler. London: I.B. Tauris, 2017. ix, 262 pp. Notes. Bibliography. Index. $110.00, hard bound. doi: 10.1017/slr.2018.170 By focusing on 1932–37, Susanne Hohler breaks new ground in English language studies by writing about emigres in Manchuria afer the Japanese occupation. She is also the frst scholar to argue that Russian fascism was an integral part of civil soci- ety. Drawing on recent challenges to the defnition of civil society as inherently toler- ant or democratic, she is interested in examining the function of movements in civil society and how they spread their infuence. To achieve this she focuses on fascists’ activities in Russian clubs, Russian education, and in promoting antisemitism. She ofers a new explanation for the spread of Russian fascism in the 1930s: she argues that it was their dense networks of associations that allowed the fascists to deeply penetrate émigré society. Arguing that Russian fascism was not just a copy of Italian or German fascism, she illustrates how efective Russian fascists were at working with likeminded individu- als and groups. Her most persuasive evidence is that of the Russian clubs that they established. Because they downplayed their association with these seemingly apo- litical institutions, they were able to serendipitously promote their political agenda. Unlike John Stephen, Hohler also emphasizes how Russian fascism difered from its western European counterparts in promoting itself as a defender and advocate of religion, and how this helped increase its popularity. Yet while all émigré organiza- tions focused, as do all diasporas, on preventing denationalization, and the fascists’