DOCSLIB.ORG

Narodnik Movement :

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

1 Narodnik Movement : --------------------------------- The Narodniks or ‘Narodniki’ were the participants of a 19th century Socialist movement in Russia. They believed in using the force of peasantry in political propaganda would lead to the awakening of the masses. Under their leadership this ‘Populist’ kind of movement tried to lead to the liberalization from the shackles of Czarist regime. As 19th century Russia was predominantly an agricultural country and the peasants, called ‘Narod’ in Russian language, represented the majority of the people, hence the movement also came to be known as ‘Narodnik’. The movement arose among the Russian intelligentsia in 1860s and gathered momentum in the 1870s. The dissatisfaction regarding the Emancipation manifesto of Alexander II in 1861 enhanced the pace of this movement. Actually the Emancipation Declaration indeed liberated the peasants from the shackles of serfdom. But it could not satisfy the class- interest of the peasantry for its inclination towards favouring the landlords in the redistribution of lands and by imposing an implicated system of collective compensation on the villages. The Narodniks embodied in their teachings a considerable amount of Communist ideology gathered from German philosopher Karl Marx’s works. For instance, they accepted Marx’s ideas of community ownership and production. They also rejected the idea of private enterprise as prescribed by Marx. However, the Narodniks modified two of Marx’s fundamental principles. Firstly, they believed in agrarian communism and disregarded industrial Proletariats, which, at that time, represented only a small minority of the total Russian population. Secondly, they modified Karl Marx’s theory of Historical Materialism. According to Marx, human society must progress inevitably from primitive communism to industrial capitalism and ultimately would reach the Dictatorship of the Proletariats. The Narodniks argued that such theory could not be applicable in Russian context, where peasant life was based on the traditional institution of communal land tenure—the ‘Mir’. So, for Russian situation, they advocated to skip the intermediate stage of capitalism and to shift straight from primitive communism to modern socialism. In that case, the Narodniks asserted, the ‘Mir’ or the ‘Artel’ (a primitive village productive cooperative) 2 would naturally evolve a system of production and distribution beneficial to the village community. The activities of the Narodniks developed in the late 1860s and in early 1870s in a diffuse movement known as ‘Khozhdenie-v-Narod’, which means ‘going to the people’. In this movement hundreds of young intellectuals, dressed in peasants’ cloths, canvassed in rural areas and incited the peasantry to rise against the existing socio-economic order. This led to police persecution. Lots of agitators were arrested and put on political trial. It pulled down the enthusiasm of the Narodnik movement to a great extent. Furthermore, the illiterate peasantry did not always respond to the propaganda of the Narodniks in the expected way and sometimes even acted as secret informers of the police and thus betrayed the dedicated intellectuals who were fighting for their (the peasants) causes. The combination of peasant indifference and government repression in mid-1870s drove the Narodniks to adopt more radical programme and firm method of organization. The first revolutionary Narodnik group to emerge from this situation was ‘Zemlya-i-Volya’ (which means ‘Land and Freedom’). Zemlya-i-Volya initially continued to work among the peasantry. However, too much police intervention soon compelled them in resorting to the avenue of secret terrorism. In 1879 A.D., Zemlya-i-Volya split into two groups—‘Narodnaya Volya’ (means ‘People’s Will’) and ‘Chorny Peredel’ (means ‘Black Repartition’). Narodnaya Volya was exclusively a terrorist society, which got disintegrated after they assassinated Czar Alexander II in 1881. ‘Chorny Peredel’ was a party that continued to emphasize on working among the peasantry until its members sifted their attention to the urban proletariat in late 1880s. However, in the end, it can be said that the populist ideology of the Narodnik movement had been revived by its 20th century ideological descendant—the Socialist Revolutionary Party that took the most vital role in bringing revolutionary socio-economic transition in Russian history. .
Recommended publications
  • Romanian Political Science Review Vol. XXI, No. 1 2021

    Romanian Political Science Review Vol. XXI, No. 1 2021

    Romanian Political Science Review vol. XXI, no. 1 2021 The end of the Cold War, and the extinction of communism both as an ideology and a practice of government, not only have made possible an unparalleled experiment in building a democratic order in Central and Eastern Europe, but have opened up a most extraordinary intellectual opportunity: to understand, compare and eventually appraise what had previously been neither understandable nor comparable. Studia Politica. Romanian Political Science Review was established in the realization that the problems and concerns of both new and old democracies are beginning to converge. The journal fosters the work of the first generations of Romanian political scientists permeated by a sense of critical engagement with European and American intellectual and political traditions that inspired and explained the modern notions of democracy, pluralism, political liberty, individual freedom, and civil rights. Believing that ideas do matter, the Editors share a common commitment as intellectuals and scholars to try to shed light on the major political problems facing Romania, a country that has recently undergone unprecedented political and social changes. They think of Studia Politica. Romanian Political Science Review as a challenge and a mandate to be involved in scholarly issues of fundamental importance, related not only to the democratization of Romanian polity and politics, to the “great transformation” that is taking place in Central and Eastern Europe, but also to the make-over of the assumptions and prospects of their discipline. They hope to be joined in by those scholars in other countries who feel that the demise of communism calls for a new political science able to reassess the very foundations of democratic ideals and procedures.
  • 'Who and What Is Peter Petroff

    'Who and What Is Peter Petroff

    The University of Manchester Research In and out of the swamp Document Version Accepted author manuscript Link to publication record in Manchester Research Explorer Citation for published version (APA): Morgan, K. (2013). In and out of the swamp: the unpublished autobiography of Peter Petroff. Scottish Labour History, 48, 23-51. Published in: Scottish Labour History Citing this paper Please note that where the full-text provided on Manchester Research Explorer is the Author Accepted Manuscript or Proof version this may differ from the final Published version. If citing, it is advised that you check and use the publisher's definitive version. General rights Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the Research Explorer are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. Takedown policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please refer to the University of Manchester’s Takedown Procedures [http://man.ac.uk/04Y6Bo] or contact [email protected] providing relevant details, so we can investigate your claim. Download date:01. Oct. 2021 In and out of the swamp: the unpublished autobiography of Peter Petroff1 Kevin Morgan ‘Who and what is Peter Petroff?’ The question infamously put by the pro-war socialist paper Justice in December 1915 has only ever been partly answered. As the editors of Justice well knew, Petroff (1884-1947) was a leading figure on the internationalist wing of the British Socialist Party (BSP) whom John Maclean had recently invited to Glasgow on behalf of the party’s Glasgow district council.
  • O Marxismo De Matriz Comunista E O Nacionalismo Popular No Peru E No Brasil (1928-1964)

    O Marxismo De Matriz Comunista E O Nacionalismo Popular No Peru E No Brasil (1928-1964)

    UNIVERSIDADE DE SÃO PAULO FACULDADE DE FILOSOFIA, LETRAS E CIÊNCIAS HUMANAS DEPARTAMENTO DE CIÊNCIA POLÍTICA PROGRAMA DE PÓS-GRADUAÇÃO EM CIÊNCIA POLÍTICA Entre a nação e a revolução: o marxismo de matriz comunista e o nacionalismo popular no Peru e no Brasil (1928-1964) André Kaysel Velasco e Cruz São Paulo 2014 UNIVERSIDADE DE SÃO PAULO FACULDADE DE FILOSOFIA, LETRAS E CIÊNCIAS HUMANAS DEPARTAMENTO DE CIÊNCIA POLÍTICA PROGRAMA DE PÓS-GRADUAÇÃO EM CIÊNCIA POLÍTICA Entre a nação e a revolução: o marxismo de matriz comunista e o nacionalismo popular no Peru e no Brasil (1928-1964) André Kaysel Velasco e Cruz Tese apresentada ao Programa De Pós-Graduação do Departamento de Ciência Política da Faculdade de Filosofia, Letras e Ciências Humanas da Universidade de São Paulo para a obtenção do título de Doutor em Ciência Política Orientador: Prof. Dr. Bernardo Ricupero São Paulo 2014 2 Resumo: esta tese tem por objeto as relações entre o marxismo de matriz comunista e o nacionalismo popular no Peru, entre os anos 1920 e19 30, e no Brasil, entre as décadas de 1950 e 1960. Parto da hipótese de que foram essas duas correntes ideológicas concorrentes que plasmaram, entre os anos 1920 e a Revolução Cubana, o universo político-ideológico das esquerdas latino-americanas, em particular, e das classes subalternas do subcontinente, de modo geral. O maior sucesso dos nacionalistas populares em ganhar a adesão dos trabalhadores se deveria à incompreensão dos comunistas em relação à especificidade da questão nacional na região, isto é: o caráter inconcluso da formação das “comunidades imaginadas” nacionais, tanto pela exclusão da cidadania de amplas camadas populares, como pela dependência externa.
  • Understanding the Roots of Collectivism and Individualism in Russia Through an Exploration of Selected Russian Literature - and - Spiritual Exercises Through Art

    Understanding the Roots of Collectivism and Individualism in Russia Through an Exploration of Selected Russian Literature - and - Spiritual Exercises Through Art

    Understanding the Roots of Collectivism and Individualism in Russia through an Exploration of Selected Russian Literature - and - Spiritual Exercises through Art. Understanding Reverse Perspective in Old Russian Iconography by Ihar Maslenikau B.A., Minsk, 1991 Extended Essays Submitted in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts in the Graduate Liberal Studies Program Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences © Ihar Maslenikau 2015 SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY Fall 2015 Approval Name: Ihar Maslenikau Degree: Master of Arts Title: Understanding the Roots of Collectivism and Individualism in Russia through an Exploration of Selected Russian Literature - and - Spiritual Exercises through Art. Understanding of Reverse Perspective in Old Russian Iconography Examining Committee: Chair: Gary McCarron Associate Professor, Dept. of Communication Graduate Chair, Graduate Liberal Studies Program Jerry Zaslove Senior Supervisor Professor Emeritus Humanities and English Heesoon Bai Supervisor Professor Faculty of Education Paul Crowe External Examiner Associate Professor Humanities and Asia-Canada Program Date Defended/Approved: November 25, 2015 ii Abstract The first essay is a sustained reflection on and response to the question of why the notion of collectivism and collective coexistence has been so deeply entrenched in the Russian society and in the Russian psyche and is still pervasive in today's Russia, a quarter of a century after the fall of communism. It examines the development of ideas of collectivism and individualism in Russian society, focusing on the cultural aspects based on the examples of selected works from Russian literature. It also searches for the answers in the philosophical works of Vladimir Solovyov, Nicolas Berdyaev and Vladimir Lossky.
  • The Moral Mappings of South and North ANNUAL of EUROPEAN and GLOBAL STUDIES ANNUAL of EUROPEAN and GLOBAL STUDIES

    The Moral Mappings of South and North ANNUAL of EUROPEAN and GLOBAL STUDIES ANNUAL of EUROPEAN and GLOBAL STUDIES

    The Moral Mappings of South and North ANNUAL OF EUROPEAN AND GLOBAL STUDIES ANNUAL OF EUROPEAN AND GLOBAL STUDIES Editors: Ireneusz Paweł Karolewski, Johann P. Arnason and Peter Wagner An annual collection of the best research on European and global themes, the Annual of European and Global Studies publishes issues with a specific focus, each addressing critical developments and controversies in the field. xxxxxx Peter Wagner xxxxxx The Moral Mappings of South and North Edited by Peter Wagner Edited by Peter Wagner Edited by Peter Cover image: xxxxx Cover design: www.paulsmithdesign.com ISBN: 978-1-4744-2324-3 edinburghuniversitypress.com 1 The Moral Mappings of South and North Annual of European and Global Studies An annual collection of the best research on European and global themes, the Annual of European and Global Studies publishes issues with a specific focus, each addressing critical developments and controversies in the field. Published volumes: Religion and Politics: European and Global Perspectives Edited by Johann P. Arnason and Ireneusz Paweł Karolewski African, American and European Trajectories of Modernity: Past Oppression, Future Justice? Edited by Peter Wagner Social Transformations and Revolutions: Reflections and Analyses Edited by Johann P. Arnason & Marek Hrubec www.edinburghuniversitypress.com/series/aegs Annual of European and Global Studies The Moral Mappings of South and North Edited by Peter Wagner Edinburgh University Press is one of the leading university presses in the UK. We publish academic books and journals in our selected subject areas across the humanities and social sciences, combining cutting-edge scholarship with high editorial and production values to produce academic works of lasting importance.
  • A History Untold by Valdis V

    A History Untold by Valdis V

    “Tearing Apart the Bear” and British Military Involvement in the Construction of Modern Latvia: A History Untold by Valdis V. Rundāns BASc, Waterloo, 1975 BA, Victoria, 2008 A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of MASTER of ARTS in the Department of History © Valdis V. Rundāns, 2014 University of Victoria All rights reserved. This thesis may not be reproduced in whole or in part, by photocopy or other means, without the permission of the author. ii Supervisory Committee “Tearing Apart the Bear” and British Military Involvement in the Construction of Modern Latvia: A History Untold by Valdis V. Rundāns BASc, Waterloo, 1975 BA, Victoria, 2008 Supervisory Committee Dr. Serhy Yekelchyk (Department of History) Supervisor Dr. Perry Biddiscombe, (Department of History) Departmental Member iii Abstract Supervisory Committee Dr Serhy Yekelchyk (Department of History) Supervisor Dr. Perry Biddiscombe (Department of History) Departmental Member Despite significant evidence to the contrary in the Latvian language, especially the memoirs of General Pēteris Radzinš, Latvians, historians included, and others, have persisted in mythologizing the military events of 8 October to 11 November 1919 in Riga as some sort of national miracle. Since this Latvian army victory, first celebrated as Lāčplēsis Day on 11 November1920, accounts of this battle have been unrepresented, poorly represented or misrepresented. For example, the 2007 historical film Rīgas Sargi (The Defenders of Riga) uses the 1888 poem Lāčplēsis by Andrējs Pumpurs as a template to portray the Latvians successfully defeating the German-Russian force on their own without Allied military aid. Pumpurs’ dream and revolutionary legacy has provided a well used script for Latvian nation building.
  • The New Left. 1968 and Post Scriptum La Nueva Izquierda

    The New Left. 1968 and Post Scriptum La Nueva Izquierda

    Revista Mexicana de Ciencias Políticas y Sociales⎥ Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México Nueva Época, Año LXIII, núm. 234 ⎥ septiembr-ediciembre de 2018 ⎥ pp. 85-98⎥ ISSN-2448-492X DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.22201/fcpys.2448492xe.2018.234.65558 The New Left. 1968 and Post Scriptum La Nueva Izquierda. 1968 y post scriptum Michael Walzer∗ Recibido el 29 de junio de 2018 Aceptado el 15 de julio de 2018 INTRODUCTORY NOTE NOTA INTRODUCTORIA The author, a well know theorist and activist of El autor, teórico y activista del movimiento de the civil rights movement and the movement los derechos civiles y de los movimientos contra against the Vietnam War, published the first la guerra en Vietnam, publicó la primera parte part of this article in 1968. There, he analyses de este artículo en 1968. En él, analiza la emer- the emergence of the New Left in the United gencia de la Nueva Izquierda en Estados Unidos States –and its global connection– through the –y su conexión global– a partir de la estructura social structure, the actors’ class background social, la pertenencia de clase de los propios ac- and their cultural configuration to account for tores y su configuración cultural para dar cuenta the aspirations and limits that accompanied the de las aspiraciones y limitantes que acompaña- middle class youth that lead this movement. The ron a la juventud de clase media que encabezó dilemmas that emerged between the racial, eth- este movimiento. Los dilemas que emergieron nic, social and economic axes that defined the entre la configuración étnico-racial, social y actors framed the diverse social movements and económica de los actores enmarcados en el mo- throw light on the promises, scope and weak- vimiento por los derechos humanos arrojan luz nesses that characterized them.
  • An Appraisal of Ernest Gellner's Writings on Nationalism

    An Appraisal of Ernest Gellner's Writings on Nationalism

    B.J.Pol.S. 27, 191–222 Copyright 1997 Cambridge University Press Printed in Great Britain On the Nature of Nationalism: An Appraisal of Ernest Gellner’s Writings on Nationalism BRENDAN O’LEARY* Ernest Gellner’s is the best-known modernist explanatory theory of nationalism. This article summarizes its expression and development before considering its strengths and weaknesses. Discussion centres on Gellner’s functionalist mode of explanation, the place of nationalism in his philosophy of history, the predictive and retrodictive nature of his theory, and the merits of his typology of nationalism. The apolitical character of his writings is emphasized: in particular, though Gellner established the connections between nationalism and egalitarianism in modern societies, he did not emphasize the mutually reinforcing relationships between nationalism, egalitarianism and democratization; moreover, his contempt for nationalist doctrines is not something liberals, socialists and conservatives need share. The theoretical problem is to separate the quite spurious ‘national’ and ‘natural’ justifications and explanations of nationalism, from the genuine, time- and context-bound roots of it. Ernest Gellner, Thought and Change, 1964, p. 151. Nationalism, the most potent principle of political legitimacy in the modem world, holds that the nation should be collectively and freely institutionally expressed, and ruled by its co-nationals. Recent events demonstrate nationalist movements retain the capacity to shake states and empires, as well as the pieties
  • Populism and Democratic Theory

    Populism and Democratic Theory

    LS15CH04_Mansbridge ARjats.cls October 1, 2019 12:31 Annual Review of Law and Social Science Populism and Democratic Theory Jane Mansbridge1 and Stephen Macedo2 1Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138, USA 2Department of Politics, Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey 08540, USA Annu. Rev. Law Soc. Sci. 2019. 15:59–77 Keywords The Annual Review of Law and Social Science is online populism, core-plus, antipluralism, leader, democratic theory, liberal at lawsocsci.annualreviews.org democracy https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-101518- 042843 Abstract Copyright © 2019 by Annual Reviews. Commentators routinely describe “populism” as vague. Some argue that the All rights reserved early US populists, who coined the modern usage, were not populists. We Annu. Rev. Law. Soc. Sci. 2019.15:59-77. Downloaded from www.annualreviews.org Access provided by Princeton University Library on 02/25/20. For personal use only. This article is part of a special symposium on disagree and identify this common conceptual core: the “people” in a moral Populism and Law. For a list of other articles in this symposium, see https://www.annualreviews.org/ battle against “elites.” The core definition fits all cases of populism: those toc/lawsocsci/15/1 on the left and right, those in the United States, Europe, and elsewhere. In addition to this minimal common core, we identify strongly suggested and frequently correlated non-core characteristics. These include the people’s homogeneity and exclusivity, direct rule, and nationalism, as well as a single leader, vilification of vulnerable out-groups, and impatience with deliberation. The US Populist Party and Spain’s Podemos Party fit the core definition but have few of the other characteristics.
  • The Origins of Non-Violence

    The Origins of Non-Violence

    The Origins of Non-violence Tolstoy and Gandhi in Their Historical Settings Martin Green The Origins of Non-violence This book describes the world-historical forces, acting on the periphery of the modern world—in Russia in the nineteenth century—which developed the idea of nonviolence in Tolstoy and then in Gandhi. It was from Tolstoy that Gandhi first learned of this idea, but those world-historical forces acted upon and through both men. The shape of the book is a convergence, the coming together of two widely separate lives, under the stress of history. The lives of Tolstoy and Gandhi begin at widely separate points— of time, of place, of social origin, of talent and of conviction; in the course of their lives, they become, respectively, military officer and novelist, and lawyer and political organizer. They win fame in those roles; but in the last two decades of their lives, they occupy the same special space—ascetic/saint/prophet. Tolstoy and Gandhi were at first agents of modern reform, in Russia and India. But then they became rebels against it and led a profound resistance—a resistance spiritually rooted in the traditionalism of myriad peasant villages. The book’s scope and sweep are enormous. Green has made history into an absorbing myth—a compelling and moving story of importance to all scholars and readers concerned with the history of ideas. www.mkgandhi.org Page 1 The Origins of Non-violence Preface This book tells how the modern version of nonviolence—and Satyagraha, and war-resistance, and one kind of anti-imperialism, even— were in effect invented by Tolstoy and Gandhi.
  • How to Cite Complete Issue More Information About This Article Journal's Homepage in Redalyc.Org Scientific Information System R

    How to Cite Complete Issue More Information About This Article Journal's Homepage in Redalyc.Org Scientific Information System R

    Revista mexicana de ciencias políticas y sociales ISSN: 0185-1918 UNAM, Facultad de Ciencias Políticas y Sociales, División de Estudios de Posgrado Walzer, Michael The New Left. 1968 and Post Scriptum Revista mexicana de ciencias políticas y sociales, vol. LXIII, no. 234, September-December, 2018, pp. 85-97 UNAM, Facultad de Ciencias Políticas y Sociales, División de Estudios de Posgrado DOI: 10.22201/fcpys.2448492xe.2018.234.65558 Available in: http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=42159667005 How to cite Complete issue Scientific Information System Redalyc More information about this article Network of Scientific Journals from Latin America and the Caribbean, Spain and Portugal Journal's homepage in redalyc.org Project academic non-profit, developed under the open access initiative Revista Mexicana de Ciencias Políticas y Sociales⎥ Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México Nueva Época, Año LXIII, núm. 234 ⎥ septiembr-ediciembre de 2018 ⎥ pp. 85-98⎥ ISSN-2448-492X DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.22201/fcpys.2448492xe.2018.234.65558 The New Left. 1968 and Post Scriptum La Nueva Izquierda. 1968 y post scriptum Michael Walzer∗ Recibido el 29 de junio de 2018 Aceptado el 15 de julio de 2018 INTRODUCTORY NOTE NOTA INTRODUCTORIA The author, a well know theorist and activist of El autor, teórico y activista del movimiento de the civil rights movement and the movement los derechos civiles y de los movimientos contra against the Vietnam War, published the first la guerra en Vietnam, publicó la primera parte part of this article in 1968. There, he analyses
  • Between Marxism and Liberal Democracy: Romanian Agrarianism As an Economic Third Way

    Between Marxism and Liberal Democracy: Romanian Agrarianism As an Economic Third Way

    Between Marxism and Liberal Democracy: Romanian Agrarianism as an Economic Third Way Angela Harre Discourses on the dissolution of an idyllic “old society”, which was said to stand in a radical contradiction to a “disastrous and chaotic” modernity, are not at all limited to Eastern Europe. Already during the second half of the 19th century these, discourses also started to dominate within Western eco- nomic philosophy discussions. Debates concerning “Englishness” versus industrialization in Great Britain, ruralization versus industrialization in Germany or – respectively – “ruralizzazione o industrializzazione” in fascist Italy during the 1920s1 all had to do with the human wish of living in a sta- ble, clearly arranged community and the imputation of an ever-changing, modern civilization. In the Balkan states these debates were stimulated by Russian philoso- phers belonging to the Slavophil and Narodnik schools. Especially agrarian socialist ideas spread to these countries in connection with the exile of hun- dreds of Russian revolutionaries after the murder of Tsar Alexander II in 1881, and with Stolipyn’s agrarian reforms in 1906, culminating after the last European peasant revolt in Romania in 1907. There were apparent dif- ferences between Eastern and Western European philosophical thinking. In Western Europe, these discourses were dominated by an enormous trust in the power of an infinite human knowledge, which resulted in an unlimited optimism of economic and scientific progress, lasting as late as during the interwar period. This optimism seems to have been limited to Western Europe. Many Ro- manians had a reaction of frustration instead. They dealt with economic af- fairs already during the second half of the 19th century.