DOCSLIB.ORG

24. Asya Atanasova. Pavel Axelrod On

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
24. Asya Atanasova. Pavel Axelrod On 1 ALMANACH VIA EVRASIA, 2014, 3 Asya Atanasova, Assist. Prof. Dr. in Russian History, Shumen University PAVEL AXELROD ON BOLSHEVISM Unfortunately, our society has not reached the time when ideologies like Bolshevism will forever become part of the past. Though people know them and are familiar with the horror they bring with them, today there are still people, parties and countries that proudly call themselves their followers. If we take a look at Ukraine, we shall see a bloody, fratricidal war and young people greeting each other with highly raised hands, holding Molotov cocktail and naming Stepan Bandera their idol. These young people are not only fearless when referring to themselves as fascists but they take pleasure in watching humans die. The so-called separatists are unscrupulous when destroying the enemy. The war in Ukraine today bears the modern name a hybrid war but the result is thousands of victims, mostly women and children. Human mind finds it difficult to assume such a thing, especially when it is happening some kilometres away and here in Europe. It is also hard to accept the way this very Europe that considers itself liberal and democratic, reacts to what’s going on there. Yet, what happens in Ukraine is not Europe’s fault and it is not its job to teach two democratic states how to interact. It is even more difficult to turn on the TV and see a person being decapitated. A bunch of people who want to establish “An Islamic State” that has no boundaries at the present but pretends to have many, and kills everyone daring to 2 contradict their policy. They are supported by the oil they sell to countries, which are in fact their enemies. The end justifies the means. Fascists, Bolsheviks, a hybrid war – the names and actions do not matter for the victims and their families. All of the above said raises many questions: why Bolshevism and Fascism are still alive today; who are the fascists – those who murder or those who support the murderers and do nothing to stop them; do we need to worry about the fact that some people consider killing an ordinary thing when not agreeing with people having different religion, nationality and ideology? Thousands of volumes have been written on Bolshevism, we know what results from the coup of 1917 instigated by the Bolsheviks in Russia i.e. the death of millions of people. Even at that time there were a lot of people who knew the real face of Lenin’s followers. Those people regarded the October Revolution not as the Great Revolution but as a curse. Their warnings and appeals for stopping the Bolsheviks are left unheard and misunderstood just as the messages of the Vekhi collection remain in the history after the revolution of 1905-1907. A constant fight against Bolshevism and its activities is required and this is also aplicable to Fascism. Probably the most important questions are what attracted and still attracts people to these doctrines, why they are still present even after we are acquainted with their methods and results. The saddest conclusion made could be that the masses of people have always been attracted by the power players, by empty promises, by the possibility to stamp and humiliate the different people. Even if that is the case, all other people should not acquiesce. Those who are familiar with the Bolsheviks and their way of thinking are the Mensheviks. Both political trends had been together in their fight against the Tsarism even before the Russian Social Democratic Labour Party was established. But they split at their Second Congress in London in 1903. The Mensheviks do not approve of the way the other party members choose, of their 3 methods and mainly of their readiness to trample on everything in order to climb to power. One of their most famous and respected leaders is Pavel Axelrod1. In contrast to the Bolsheviks who identify with Lenin, the Mensheviks go through various stages in their development and follow not just one or two leaders. The very faction splits into multiple trends. In P. Axelrod’s opinion the strength of Menshevism results from the pluralism of its various groups, combined with their joint actions. But we should not forget that in 1917 the lack of unity is one of their drawbacks in their fight against the Bolsheviks. Despite this, the pursuit of democracy stays a characteristic of the Mensheviks and it is something that their opponents completely lack. P. Axelrod is one of the few Menshevik leaders who never change their views on series of important questions, especially in regard to the need to fight the Bolshevik ideas for changing RSDLP. He becomes the ideologist of the faction; everyone turns to him for advice, he is incredibly knowledgeable and well- known among the Western social democrats. Yuliy Osipovich Cederbaum (Martov) writes in his letter to Axelrod that everyone quotes him and they learn from him and that when it comes to the party and the working class – “things go the Axelrod way“2. Boris Nikolaevski adds that Axelrod’s works are „the first foundations for shaping the ideas of Menshevism“3. The two splendid articles that lay that foundation are: „The unification of the Russian social democracy and its tasks“and „To the issue of the source and the meaning of our organizational discrepancies“4. The articles discuss a series of important issues 1 For more details on P. Axelrod, see: Nenarokov, А. Последняя эмиграция Павла Аксельрода. М., 2001; Савельев, П. П. Б. Аксельрод: человек и политик. - Новая и новейшая история., 1998, 2, 3; Аксельрод, А. Пережитое и передуманное. Berlin, 1923, vol.1, 2. 2 Letters of P. B. Axelrod and Yu. О. Martov. Berlin, 1924, p. 146. 3 Iskra, 30 March 1905. 4 Iskra, № 55, 15 December 1903. 4 like the role of the intelligentsia in creating RSDLP and its consequences; the characteristics of the Russian reality and the way they influence the face of the political parties; the great discrepancies between the Western and Russian workers; the missions of the social democrats and many others. These articles together with everything else said and written by “the patriarch” of the Mensheviks have a huge importance for the building of the faction. But if we want to look into his fight against the Bolsheviks and his advice on how to lead that fight, we need to pay close attention to his letter of September, 1920 to Martov. The letter itself has an interesting history. Parts of it are published for the first time in 1921 in “Socialisticheskii newspaper” published in Berlin. Although there is great interest to the words of P. Axelrod, just a very small part of the letter is published and some crucial parts are skipped. The Menshevik works on the letter for a long time, he writes several rough copies and gradually starts “to get lost” in them. He himself confesses that he experiences “logical and architectural difficulties” and so he makes the decision to give all versions of the letter to Vladimir Voitinski5. The latter has the difficult task of assembling all sheets pf paper and giving Martov what he considers to be the most appropriate. In 2008, Albert Nenarokov - one of the Russian historians who had contributed the most to getting to know Menshevism, published a book that contained the full text of P. Axelrod’s letter. The book also presents the version, made by V. Voitinski and its French translation, the publication in Socialisticheskii newspaper, as well as the Russian translation of the French brochure. The book is published with the help of the Russian United Democratic Party “Yabloko” and the epilogue is written by Grigory Yavlinsky: „During the whole time in Russia Bolshevism is and remains a force… a reaction no matter what forms it takes to cover itself“… He perpetuates “the most undeveloped Asian forms of the movement” in contradiction to the European ones… Now, as 5 Nenarokov, А. История одного письма. М., 2008, p. 19. 5 it was back then, there are a few people of those who understand where all this leads to. The denial of Bolshevism in its various forms is necessary today not less than it was in the first decades of the last century“. The first one to read the letter, of course after P. Axelrod gives his permission, is Irakli Tsereteli. He is one of the prominent leaders of the Mensheviks who define their policy at a time, quite important for them. His name is related to the period of their upsurge, between February and October, 1917 and to the time of their political downfall after the month of October when they lose the battle against the Bolsheviks. The choice to allow the letter to be read by Irakli Tsereteli for the first time is not accidental as he and the author opposed Martov’s position on the Bolsheviks. The problem how to proceed with the fight against the Bolsheviks after they come into power, becomes a major one for the Mensheviks. While P. Axelrod, Ir. Tsereteli and Alexander Potresov are ready to get to the end, Martov turns into the “rightful” leader of the Soviet opposition. According to him, an armed rebellion shall lead to the outbreak of a civil war. He hopes that people will quickly become disappointed with the Bolsheviks and will see their true character. Despite the rebukes he receives from those who see “a Bolshevik deviation” in his position, he never really stops his fierce criticism of their government which eventually ends with him being expelled from Russia. Ir.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Jewish Socialists Around Vpered1
    BORIS SAPIR JEWISH SOCIALISTS AROUND VPERED1 SOCIALIST PROPAGANDA AMONG JEWS AND VPERED The importance of the "Lavrists" or "Vperedovtsy", named after the publication Vpered (Forward) (i873-1877) founded and edited by Peter Lavrovich Lavrov, in the evolution of the socialist ideas and groups in Russia has been recognized by historians from Alphonse Thun to Franco Venturi.2 The journal's role in the dissemination of the socialist credo among Russian Jews has never been seriously disputed, although seldom recorded in concrete terms. Of the leading Lavrists only Nicolas Kuliabko-Koretskii left memoirs.3 But he, as well as Lavrov who compiled an interesting outline of the main phases of the "Narodnichestvo"4 were not exceedingly interested in the Jewish aspect of their oeuvre. They touched this topic only in passing and, if at all, referred to Liberman whose Jewish socialism captivated their imagination. There was no reason for them to indicate and to dwell on the Jewish origin of socialist Jews in their midst who never associated themselves with any Jewish cause or aspirations. The outsiders who did so many years afterwards, knew too little about the internal affairs of Vpered and, therefore, either exaggerated its influence among Jews or underestimated the importance of leading Jewish Lavrists or, which 1 With slight changes this paper was read at the YIVO Research Conference on Jewish participation in movements devoted to the cause of social progress, New York, September 10-13, '964. 1 A. Thun, Geschichte der revolutionaren Bewegung in Russland, Leipzig 1883; F. Venturi, Roots of Revolution, London i960. The reader of this journal may find a condensed treatment of the position and influence of Vpered in Boris Sapir, Unknown Chapters in the history of Vpered, in: International Review of Social History, Vol.
    [Show full text]
  • Lenin, What Is to Be Done.Indd
    XIII Editor’s Preface This work saw the light of day in the heat of a decisive battle for the international proletariat. What Is to Be Done? constituted the essential weapon with which to fight revisionism. This, even in its Russian form, denied the scientific nature of Marxist analysis, i.e. it excluded for the proletariat even the possibility of equip- ping itself with a strategy. What Is to Be Done? is the precious magnifying glass that allows us to reread the chapters of the history of our class from a Leninist point of view. In order to do this, we can follow the Russian script. Between 1884 and 1894, Marxist theory gathered strength, but the Marxists, among the currents of avant-garde thought, only had very few disciples. Between 1894 and 1898, the labour movement revealed its political awakening in the struggle via strikes. 1898-1902 was a period of dispersion, of theoretical and organisational eclecticism ; it was the artisanal phase of the political struggle fought by the vanguard of the Russian proletariat. What Is to Be Done? was published as the theoretical guidebook allowing that phase to be left behind. Lenin focused on the Russian precursors of revolutionary Marxism. The latter had the merit of being considered the world vanguard of the revolutionary democratic movement. Lenin hoped that the nascent social-democratic movement would be able to be nurtured with the « same devoted de- termination and vigour ». Eighteen years later, in “Left-Wing” Communism : an Infantile Disorder, he picked up this concept again and underlined it : « For about half a century – approximately from the forties to the nineties of the last century – progressive thought in XIV Lenin – What Is to Be Done Russia, oppressed by a most brutal and reactionary tsarism, sought eagerly for a correct revolutionary theory, and fol- lowed with the utmost diligence and thoroughness each and every “last word” in this sphere in Europe and America.
    [Show full text]
  • THE MENSHEVIKS in 1917 by Olegpmwkov Bachelor of Arts
    THE MENSHEVIKS IN 1917 r:. = BY OLEGpmwKOV Bachelor of Arts Moscow State Pedagogical Institute Moscow, USSR 1983 Submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate College of the Oklahoma State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of MASTER OF ARTS July 1992 THE MENSHEVIKS IN 1917 Thesis Approved: Thesis Advisor 0 Dean of the Graduate College 11 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I wish to express sincere appreciation to Dr. George F. Jewsbury and Dr. Joel M. Jenswold for their encouragement and advice throughout my graduate program. Many thanks also go to Dr. W. Roger Biles for serving on my graduate committee. Their suggestions and support were very helpful throughout the study. To Wann Smith for his expert typing and proofing skills; to Oscar Kursner for his help in translation. My wife, Y elaina Khripkov, encouraged and supported me all the way and helped me keep the end goal constantly in sight. Thanks go to her for her undivided time in the final stages of the project. She prov 1ded moral support and was a real believer in my abilities. 111 TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter Page I. The Main Approaches to the Study of the Russian Revolution in American Historiography 2 The Study of Menshevism in the U.S. 6 Soviet Scholars on Menshevism 8 Sources 1 2 Themes and Problems 14 II. Tiffi "HONEYMOON' OF Tiffi REVOLUTION_~-~-~! 8 The Necessity for the Dual Power 1 8 The Essence and Structure of Dual Power 2 7 Establishing of the Revolutionary Defensists Policy3 5 III. THE APRIL CRISIS AND ITS CONSEQUENCES _____4 7 The First Clash.
    [Show full text]
  • The Influences of Chernyshevsky, Tkachev, and Nechaev on The
    THE INFLITENCES OF CHERNYSHEVSKY, TKA,CHEV, AI'ID NECHAEV ON TIIE POLTTTCAL THOUGHT OF V.I. LETITIN THE INFLUENCES OF CHERNySHEVSKY, TKACHEV, AND NECHASV ON THE POLITICAL THOUGHT OF V.I. LENIN BY IAII GRAEI.{E WALLACE, B"A. (Hons) A Thesis Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies in Partial Fulfilnent of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Arts McMaster University (c) Copyright by Ian Wallace lAct{ASTER UNIVERSITY LTBRARY I,IASTER OF ARTS (L9921 Mc}TASTER I'NIVERSITY (Political Science) Hamilton, Ontario TITLE: The fnfluences of Chernyshevsky, Tkachev, and Nechaev on the political thought of V.f. Lenin. AIIIHOR: Ian Graene Wallace, B.A. (Hons) (McMaster University) SIJPERVISOR: Professor Marshall Goldstein. NIJI{BER OF PAGES: v, L82 lt ABsTRACT The collapse of the Soviet Union has challenged Marxist political theory. Many people saw the collapse of the Soviet Union as a defeat of Marxisn. Most scholars of Poritical Theory rearize that Lenin did not folrow Marxist writings. However, most still consider Lenin as predominately a Marxist. This thesis witl examine the source of Lenin,s ideas on Class, the Party, and the Revolution, and will trace these differences with Marx to chernyshevsky, Tkachev, and Nechaev. rt will irrustrate the extent of the influence of Lenints Russian, non-Marxist, predecessors. Lenin did indeed study and adopt aspects of Marxisn, but he d.iffered with hin in some important areas, particularly Class, the Party, and the Revolution. Marx, writing in western Europe, sought human emancipation, whire Lenin, in backlrard, autocratic Russia, sought political emancipation from the Tsarist autocracy. This resurted in differences between the thought and writings of Lenin and Marx.
    [Show full text]
  • Coversheet for Thesis in Sussex Research Online
    A University of Sussex DPhil thesis Available online via Sussex Research Online: http://eprints.sussex.ac.uk/ This thesis is protected by copyright which belongs to the author. This thesis cannot be reproduced or quoted extensively from without first obtaining permission in writing from the Author The content must not be changed in any way or sold commercially in any format or medium without the formal permission of the Author When referring to this work, full bibliographic details including the author, title, awarding institution and date of the thesis must be given Please visit Sussex Research Online for more information and further details Lenin and the Iskra Faction of the RSDLP 1899-1903 Richard Mullin Doctor of Philosophy Resubmission University of Sussex March 2010 1 I hereby declare that this thesis has not been submitted in whole or in part to another University for the award of any other degree ……………………………….. 2 Contents Contents.......................................................................................................................3 Acknowledgements……………..…………………………………………………...4 Abstract........................................................................................................................5 Notes on Names, Texts and Dates…….....……………………..…………………...6 Chapter One: Historical and Historiographical Context…………………..…....7 i) 1899-1903 in the Context of Russian Social-Democratic History and Theory …12 ii) Historiographical Trends in the Study of Lenin and the RSDLP …………...…..23 iii) How the thesis develops
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction 11. I Have Approached This Subject in Greater Detail in J. D
    NOTES Introduction 11. I have approached this subject in greater detail in J. D. White, Karl Marx and the Intellectual Origins of Dialectical Materialism (Basingstoke and London, 1996). 12. V. I. Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 38, p. 180. 13. K. Marx, Grundrisse, translated by M. Nicolaus (Harmondsworth, 1973), p. 408. 14. N. I. Ziber, Teoriia tsennosti i kapitala D. Rikardo v sviazi s pozdneishimi dopolneniiami i raz"iasneniiami. Opyt kritiko-ekonomicheskogo issledovaniia (Kiev, 1871). 15. N. G. Chernyshevskii, ‘Dopolnenie i primechaniia na pervuiu knigu politicheskoi ekonomii Dzhon Stiuarta Millia’, Sochineniia N. Chernyshevskogo, Vol. 3 (Geneva, 1869); ‘Ocherki iz politicheskoi ekonomii (po Milliu)’, Sochineniia N. Chernyshevskogo, Vol. 4 (Geneva, 1870). Reprinted in N. G. Chernyshevskii, Polnoe sobranie sochineniy, Vol. IX (Moscow, 1949). 16. Arkhiv K. Marksa i F. Engel'sa, Vols XI–XVI. 17. M. M. Kovalevskii, Obshchinnoe zemlevladenie, prichiny, khod i posledstviia ego razlozheniia (Moscow, 1879). 18. Marx to the editorial board of Otechestvennye zapiski, November 1877, in Karl Marx Frederick Engels Collected Works, Vol. 24, pp. 196–201. 19. Marx to Zasulich, 8 March 1881, in Karl Marx Frederick Engels Collected Works, Vol. 24, pp. 346–73. 10. It was published in the journal Vestnik Narodnoi Voli, no. 5 (1886). 11. D. Riazanov, ‘V Zasulich i K. Marks’, Arkhiv K. Marksa i F. Engel'sa, Vol. 1 (1924), pp. 269–86. 12. N. F. Daniel'son, ‘Ocherki nashego poreformennogo obshch- estvennogo khoziaistva’, Slovo, no. 10 (October 1880), pp. 77–143. 13. N. F. Daniel'son, Ocherki nashego poreformennogo obshchestvennogo khozi- aistva (St Petersburg, 1893). 14. V. V. Vorontsov, Sud'by kapitalizma v Rossii (St Petersburg, 1882).
    [Show full text]
  • Bolshievik Revoluition Background Guide
    Tsar to U.S.S.R: A Joint Crisis Committee on The Bolshevik Revolution Bolshevik Revolution 1 Table of Contents Overview 3 Tsar to USSR Sta 4 Letter From the Chairs 7 Logistics of this Committee 8 Tsar Nicholas II and the Romanov Family 10 Revolutionaries and the Revolution Party 11 Russo-Japanese War 12 Revolution of 1905 13 Russia and the Great War 14 Timeline 15 Characters: 16 Revolutionaries: 16 Royal Cabinet/Duma: 21 Position Paper Guiding Questions 24 Bolshevik Revolution 2 Overview The Great Empire of Russia has existed for over 450 years and the Romanovs have been in power for ⅔ of that time, but now the patched up cracks are hard to ignore. Change and innovation are slow to arrive in Russia, with the Industrial Revolution arriving decades after it emerges in Europe, making life difficult for people even before the Great War begins. Whispers of a constitutional monarchy make its way through the land as new political parties like the Constitutional Democracy Party (Cadets) emerge. The economy improves little by little but it is simply not enough to sustain the population when war begins to tear the region to shreds. The economy is in a crisis and citizens are looking for some semblance of leadership to not only improve their lives, but also their international reputation. Delegates in this joint crisis committee will get to determine the fate of Russia and her people through negotiations within their own crisis room and with delegates from the opposing side. We will begin in August of 1915 after the Russian Empire is forced to retreat from Russian Poland.
    [Show full text]
  • Workers, the Intelligentsia and Marxist Parties: St Petersburg, 1895-1917 and Shanghai, 1921-1927
    Workers, the Intelligentsia and Marxist Parties: St Petersburg, 1895-1917 and Shanghai, 1921-1927 STEVE A. SMITH* Summary: The article investigates relations between workers and intellectuals in the pre-revolutionary Bolshevik Party in St Petersburg and the Chinese Communist Party in Shanghai. It commences with a background examination of the social position and traditions of the intelligentsia in each country and the emergence of a stratum of so-called "conscious" workers. The position of workers in each party is then analysed, especially with respect to leadership, and the nature of tensions between workers and intellectuals explored. The investigation demonstrates that workers acquiesced in their subordination to a greater degree in Shanghai than in St Petersburg, and this and other differences are traced back to historical and cultural context. In conclusion, the implications of contextual differences are explored in order to suggest why the intelligentsia in the People's Republic of China (PRC) attracted greater odium from the party-state than its counterpart in the Soviet Union. The germ of this article lay in the observation of a paradox. Intellectuals suffered greatly under Communist regimes in both the Soviet Union and China, yet it was in China that they were singled out for repression.1 * My thanks go to Boris Kolonitskii, Jeremy Krikler, Nikolai Smirnov, Chris Ward and the participants in the conference on "Workers and the Intelligentsia in Late-Nineteenth and Early Twentieth-Century Russia", organized by the St Petersburg section of the Russian Academy of Sciences in St Petersburg in June 1995. This article is one of a number of essays that examine labour in St Petersburg and Shanghai comparatively, broadly exploring the development of class identity in relation to other forms of social identity.
    [Show full text]
  • George Plekhanov and the Marxist Turn in Russia." Revolutionary Moments: Reading Revolutionary Texts
    Read, Christopher. "George Plekhanov and the Marxist Turn in Russia." Revolutionary Moments: Reading Revolutionary Texts. Ed. Rachel Hammersley. London: Bloomsbury Academic, 2015. 125–132. Bloomsbury Collections. Web. 23 Sep. 2021. <http:// dx.doi.org/10.5040/9781474252669.0022>. Downloaded from Bloomsbury Collections, www.bloomsburycollections.com, 23 September 2021, 19:53 UTC. Copyright © Rachel Hammersley 2015. You may share this work for non-commercial purposes only, provided you give attribution to the copyright holder and the publisher, and provide a link to the Creative Commons licence. 1 5 George Plekhanov and the Marxist Turn in Russia C h r i s t o p h e r R e a d Th e desire to work among the people and for the people, the certitude that ‘ the emancipation of the working classes must be conquered by the working classes themselves ’ – this practical tendency of our Narodism is just as dear to me as it used to be. But its theoretical propositions seem to me, indeed, erroneous in many respects. Years of life abroad and attentive study of the social question have convinced me that the triumph of a spontaneous popular movement similar to Stepan Razin ’ s revolt or the Peasant Wars in Germany cannot satisfy the social and political needs of modern Russia, that the old forms of our national life carried within them many germs of their disintegration and that they cannot ‘ develop into a higher communist form ’ except under the immediate infl uence of a strong and well-organised workers ’ socialist party. For that reason I think that besides fi ghting absolutism the Russian revolutionaries must strive at least to work out the elements for the establishment of such a party in the future.
    [Show full text]
  • Joseph Djugashvilli (Stalin), Was Born in Gori, Georgia on 21St Decembe, 1879
    Joseph Djugashvilli (Stalin), was born in Gori, Georgia on 21st Decembe, 1879. His mother, Ekaterina Djugashvilli, was married at the age of 14 and Joseph was her fourth child to be born in less than four years. The first three died and as Joseph was prone to bad health, his mother feared on several occasions that he would also die. Understandably, given this background, Joseph's mother was very protective towards him as a child. (1) Joseph's father, Vissarion Djugashvilli, was a bootmaker and his mother took in washing. He was an extremely violent man who savagely beat both his son and wife. As a child, Joseph experienced the poverty that most peasants had to endure in Russia at the end of the 19th century. (2) Soso, as he was called throughout his childhood, contacted smallpox at the age of seven. It was usually a fatal disease and for a time it looked as if he would die. Against the odds he recovered but his face remained scarred for the rest of his life and other children cruelly called him "pocky". (3) Joseph's mother was deeply religious and in 1888 she managed to obtain him a place at the local church school. Despite his health problems, he made good progress at school. However, his first language was Georgian and although he eventually learnt Russian, whenever possible, he would speak and write in his native language and never lost his distinct Georgian accent. His father died in 1890. Bertram D. Wolfe has argued "his mother, devoutly religious and with no one to devote herself to but her sole surviving child, determined to prepare him for the priesthood." (4) Stalin left school in 1894 and his academic brilliance won him a free scholarship to the Tiflis Theological Seminary.
    [Show full text]
  • Communism – the Failed Experiment, Part III |
    act ing-man.co m http://www.acting-man.com/?p=6599 Communism – the Failed Experiment, Part III | March 7, 2011 | Author Pater Tenebrarum Dear Readers, We want to thank all of you who have donated to Acting Man. We are honored by your support. All donations will be used to optimize our services f or you. Should you wish to contribute, press the button below ... (see here f or Part I and Part II) The Bolshevik Revolution 1. The Party The Russian Social Democratic Labor Party (RSDLP) was f ounded in Minsk in 1898, in an attempt to unite the major socialist f actions active in Russia at the time. In addition to the unif ication idea, the party was meant to provide an alternative to the 'Narodnichestvo', the populist revolutionary movement that was represented by the narodniky, the young people that had begun to swarm out into the countryside in an attempt to 'educate the peasantry' (the party representing the narodniky movement was the SRP, see f urther below). The major dif f erence between these parties consisted in the f act that the RSDLP adopted Marxism as its ideological f oundation (as noted in part II of this series, the Czar's censors had mistakenly allowed the Russian translation of Marx' 'Das Kapital' to be published in Russia on the grounds that it was a 'strictly scientif ic work'. Presumably the censor charged with reading the book got bored out of his skull and one of the great ironies of history was the result). The beginning of the party's existence was inauspicious – the nine delegates attending its f irst congress were soon all arrested by the Okhrana, the Czar's secret police.
    [Show full text]
  • Workers and Intelligentsia in Late Imperial Russia: Realities, Representations, Reflections
    Workers and Intelligentsia in Late Imperial Russia: Realities, Representations, Reflections Edited by Reginald E. Zelnik Description: The collapse of the Soviet Union opened previously unimagined possibilities for insight into Russian social, intellectual, and political history. This volume, a collaboration of American, Russian, and West European scholars, illuminates the creation and complex dynamics of the Russian industrial working class from its peasant origins in the mid-nineteenth century to the collapse of the imperial system in 1917. The authors focus on the shifting attitudes, cultural norms, self-representations, and increasing self-consciousness of workers as they interacted with the new social movements, student groups, the Church, and most dramatically, the political (mainly radical and liberal) intelligentsia. But the authors also examine the obverse: the contending representations of workers by the intelligentsia as they interacted with each other ever more intensely during this turbulent period leading up to the Russian Revolution. The result is a fascinating and detailed account of social and cultural transformation in a key period of Russian — and world — history. RESEARCH SERIES / NUMBER 101 WORKERS AND INTELLIGENTSIA IN LATE IMPERIAL RUSSIA: REALITIES, REPRESENTATIONS, REFLECTIONS REGINALD E. ZELNIK, EDITOR UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT BERKELEY Three of the essays in this book have been published in somewhat different forms as journal articles. The essay by S. A. Smith first appeared (as part of a larger study of St. Petersburg and Shanghai) in International Review of Social History 41 (1996). The essay by William G. Rosenberg first appeared in Slavic Review 55 (1997). The essay by E. Anthony Swift first appeared in Russian History/Histoire Russe 23 (1996).
    [Show full text]