Obshchestvennost' and Civic Agency in Late Imperial and Soviet Russia
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Copyrighted material – 978–1–137–54722–4 Selection, introduction, conclusion and editorial content © Yasuhiro Matsui 2015 Individual chapters © Contributors 2015 All rights reserved. No reproduction, copy or transmission of this publication may be made without written permission. No portion of this publication may be reproduced, copied or transmitted save with written permission or in accordance with the provisions of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, or under the terms of any licence permitting limited copying issued by the Copyright Licensing Agency, Saffron House, 6–10 Kirby Street, London EC1N 8TS. Any person who does any unauthorized act in relation to this publication may be liable to criminal prosecution and civil claims for damages. The authors have asserted their rights to be identified as the authors of this work in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. First published 2015 by PALGRAVE MACMILLAN Palgrave Macmillan in the UK is an imprint of Macmillan Publishers Limited, registered in England, company number 785998, of Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire RG21 6XS. Palgrave Macmillan in the US is a division of St Martin’s Press LLC, 175 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY 10010. Palgrave Macmillan is the global academic imprint of the above companies and has companies and representatives throughout the world. Palgrave® and Macmillan® are registered trademarks in the United States, the United Kingdom, Europe and other countries. ISBN 978–1–137–54722–4 This book is printed on paper suitable for recycling and made from fully managed and sustained forest sources. Logging, pulping and manufacturing processes are expected to conform to the environmental regulations of the country of origin. A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Obshchestvennost’ and civic agency in late imperial and Soviet Russia : interface between state and society / edited by Yasuhiro Matsui (professor, Faculty of Social and Cultural Studies, Kyushu University, Japan). pages cm Summary: “In modernizing Russia, obshchestvennost’, an indigenous Russian word, began functioning as an indispensable term to illuminate newly emerging active parts of society and their public identities. This volume approaches various phenomena associated with obshchestvennost’ across the revolutionary divide of 1917, targeting a critic and the commercial press in the late Imperial society, workers and the public opinion in the revolutionary turmoil of 1905, the liberals during the First World War, worker-peasant correspondents in the 1920s, community activists in the 1930s, medical professionals under late Stalinism, people’s vigilante groups and comrade courts throughout the 1950s–1960s and Soviet dissidents. Furthermore, focusing on obshchestvennost’ as a strategic word appealing to active citizens for political goals, this book illustrates how the state elites and counter-elites used this word and sought a new form of state-society relation derived from their visions of progress during the late imperial and Soviet Russia”—Provided by publisher. Includes bibliographical references. ISBN 978–1–137–54722–4 (hardback) 1. Soviet Union—Social conditions. 2. Russia—Social conditions—1801–1917. 3. Civil society—Soviet Union—History. 4. Civil society—Russia—History. 5. Soviet Union— Politics and government. 6. Russia—Politics and government—1801–1917. 7. Agent (Philosophy)—Political aspects—Soviet Union—History. 8. Agent (Philosophy)— Political aspects—Russia—History. 9. Political participation—Soviet Union—History. 10. Political participation—Russia—History. I. Matsui, Yasuhiro, 1960– HN523.O266 2015 306.0947—dc23 2015021449 Typeset by MPS Limited, Chennai, India. Copyrighted material – 978–1–137–54722–4 Copyrighted material – 978–1–137–54722–4 Contents List of Tables vii Acknowledgements viii Notes on Contributors x Introduction 1 Yasuhiro Matsui 1 Russian Critics and Obshchestvennost’, 1840–1890: The Case of Vladimir Stasov 16 Yukiko Tatsumi 2 From Workers’ Milieu to the Public Arena: Workers’ Sociability and Obshchestvennost’ before 1906 34 Yoshifuru Tsuchiya 3 The Notion of Obshchestvennost’ during the First World War 61 Yoshiro Ikeda 4 Nikolai Bukharin and the Rabsel’kor Movement: Sovetskaia Obshchestvennost’ under the ‘Dictatorship of the Proletariat’ 82 Zenji Asaoka 5 Obshchestvennost’ in Residence: Community Activities in 1930s Moscow 109 Yasuhiro Matsui 6 What Was Obshchestvennost’ in the Time of Stalin? The Case of the Post-war Soviet Medical Profession 128 Mie Nakachi 7 Obshchestvennost’ in the Struggle against Crimes: The Case of People’s Vigilante Brigades in the Late 1950s and 1960s 152 Kiyohiro Matsudo 8 Public and Private Matters in Comrades’ Courts under Khrushchev 171 Kazuko Kawamoto v Copyrighted material – 978–1–137–54722–4 Copyrighted material – 978–1–137–54722–4 vi Contents 9 Obshchestvennost’ across Borders: Soviet Dissidents as a Hub of Transnational Agency 198 Yasuhiro Matsui Conclusion 219 Yasuhiro Matsui Name Index 225 Subject Index 228 Copyrighted material – 978–1–137–54722–4 Copyrighted material – 978–1–137–54722–4 Introduction Yasuhiro Matsui Obshchestvennost’ as Russia’s indigenous term Seken is an indigenous and a commonly used Japanese word. It expresses a type of lifeworld, like air, that exists between individual and society, and regulates the behaviours of almost all Japanese people. Seken, a sort of invisible force which restricts people’s individual freedom, underlies the well-ordered Japanese society that was allegedly preserved even in the case of the Great East Japan Earthquake that occurred on 11 March 2011. In search of a new approach to analysing the distinctiveness of Japanese society, some scholars have focused on this indigenous term at the exclusion of western-originated, yet widely used terms such as civil society, public sphere and others.1 A similar approach may be applicable to Russia, which started to mod- ernise at almost exactly the same time as Japan, in the middle of the nineteenth century. In so doing, obshchestvennost’, a derivative term of obshchestvo (society), is a unique word rooted in Russian history. As the term is often considered difficult to translate directly to other Western languages, it has been replaced with various phrases in English, such as public, public sphere, public opinion, social organisations, educated society, middle class and civil society. Against the background of the emergence of civil society and a growing debate around this phenomenon during regime change in Eastern Europe and the USSR from the end of the 1980s through the 1990s, obshchestvennost’ has drawn attention from quite a few schol- ars who have attempted to reconsider modern and contemporary Russian history as coloured by the autocratic rule of the Tsarist and Communist regimes. Focusing on the range of voluntary associations— like circles, clubs, charitable associations, and academic and professional 1 Copyrighted material – 978–1–137–54722–4 Copyrighted material – 978–1–137–54722–4 2 Yasuhiro Matsui organisations—that thrived in modernising Russia, rather than on state elites or people themselves, they argue for the establishment of civil society in late Tsarist Russia.2 V. Ia. Grosul, who wrote the history of obshchestvo in Russia prior to the appearance of obshchestvennost’ as both a word and reality, noted that ‘Russian society as a special social organism’, clearly distinguished from both the power of the state (gosudarstvo) and the people (narod), had emerged and developed under Peter’s reforms at the beginning of the eighteenth century. Mainly composed of aristocrats (dvorianstvo) who had been liberated from state service, it had the character of secu- lar and polite society. The important aspect of Grosul’s remark is that it was the state and its measures that enabled the emergence of Russian society, although the trend of ‘the European Enlightenment and the philosophy of rationalism’ affected the process. This relationship between state and society may be characteristic of the ensuing modern history of Russia.3 While Grosul uses the term obshchestvennost’ as an approximate syno- nym for obshchestvo,4 Vadim Volkov, who describes a concise conceptual history of obshchestvennost’ from its origins in the late eighteenth cen- tury to the Soviet period, points out that the intellectuals in the middle of the nineteenth century contrasted obshchestvennost’ with obshchestvo, which was accompanied by an implication of polite society.5 According to Volkov, obshchestvennost’ carries two basic connotations: ‘first, an abstract quality of “sociality” or social solidarity, and second, an active social agency, socially-active groups of people, the public’. Over the course of the nineteenth century, the word came to signify ‘a certain group of people sharing a set of civic virtues’ or ‘a “progressive” part of society’.6 A. S. Tumanova, a leading historian on this matter, also defines obshchestvennost’ as ‘an advanced and educated part of society that thinks with categories of public welfare and progress’.7 Based on Tumanova’s definition, obshchestvennost’ appears to over- lap with intelligentsia to a considerable extent, another word deeply rooted in Russian history. Indeed, both words, which were ‘firmly built in the language of self-description of educated Russian’, as distinct from the state and people, had been broadly circulating since the late nineteenth century, and enjoyed ‘universal acceptance in all quarters of imperial