DOCSLIB.ORG

Appendix 1 Chronology of Major Events and Lenin's Principal Writings, 1870-1924

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Appendix 1 Chronology of Major Events and Lenin's Principal Writings, 1870-1924 Dates given to 30 January 1918 are those of the Russian Old Style calendar, which was twelve days behind the West European calendar in the nineteenth century, and thirteen in the twentieth. From I February 1918 the Russian Calendar conformed to the Western. References to texts are to Lenin's Collected Works, the English translation of the fourth Russian edition in 45 vols, Moscow, 1960-70. In the shorthand notation that follows volume number is given in bold type directly followed by page number. References to Harding, 1983 are to the present author's Marxism in Russia: Key Documents (Cambridge, 1983). 1870 10 April Vladimir Illich Ulyanov (Lenin) born in Simbirsk. 1879 Lenin begins as pupil in Simbirsk classical grammar school. His headmaster, Fyodor Kerensky, is the father of Alexander Kerensky, whose government Lenin is to overthrow in October 1917. 1881 I March Tsar Alexander II assassinated by the terrorist organisation Nr..rodnaya Volya (People's Will). 1883 Formation in Geneva of the first Russian Marxist group - The Emancipation of Labour and the publication of Socialism and the Political Struggle by its leader, George Plekhanov. (Extracts in Harding, 1983, pp. 44-54.) 1886 January Lenin's father dies. 1887 March Lenin's elder brother, Alexander, arrested in plot to kill Tsar Alexander III. 8 May Lenin's brother and his accomplices executed. 281 282 Appendix 1 August Lenin enters Kazan University. December Participates in minor student protest, is arrested and expelled from University. 1888--1893 Begins to study Marx and participates in revolutionary discussion circles in Samara; studies externally for law degree from St Petersburg University; involved in controversy with leading Populists; begins collecting data on capitalism in agriculture. 1893 Autumn-Winter Arrives St Petersburg, joins leading Marxist circle at Technological Institute; and tutors workingmen's discussion circles in the Nevsky Gate area of the city. 1894 March-June Writes his first significant text, What the "Friends of the People" Are and How They Fight the Social-Democrats 1, 133- 332; this lengthy Marxist rebuttal of the economic and social arguments of the Russian Populists was the first publication of the social democrats within Russia. 1895 Spring Arrival of the brochure On Agitation in St Petersburg (in Harding, 1983, pp. 192- 205). April-May Goes abroad to contact emigre Emancipation of Labour Group in Geneva; greatly impresses Plekhanov and Akselrod. May-September In France, Switzerland and Germany meeting prominent Marxists; returns to Russia, visiting working-class centres to arrange publication and distribution of projected journal Rabotnik. November-December Strike wave in St Petersburg and elsewhere; writes a number of agitational leaflets and prepares copy for underground newspaper. Writes his Draft and Explanation of a Programme for the Social-Democratic Party, 2, 95-121. 8 December Lenin and other prominent leaders of the St Petersburg Union of Struggle for the Emancipation of the Working Class arrested. 1896 Spring Begins preparations for a comprehensive study of the evolution of capitalism in Russia. June Most extensive strikes to date in St Petersburg textile industry. Chronology of Events/Lenin's Writings 283 1897 January Renewed strikes in textile industry; Lenin exiled to Shushenskoye for three years. May Arrives at place of exile; continues to write agitational pamphlets and articles on economic theory. Winter Writes The Tasks of the Russian Social Democrats, 2, 327-51; continues drafting his major study on capitalism in Russia. 1898 1 March Foundation Congress of the Russian Social Democratic Labour Party (RSDLP) in Minsk, its Manifesto written by Peter Struve (in Harding, 1983, pp. 223-6). July Lenin marries Nadezhda Krupskaya; they work together translating History of Trade Unionism by Sidney and Beatrice Webb. August Lenin completes the draft of his major study The Development of Capitalism in Russia, 3, 25-632. This text was published in March 1899 and constitutes arguably his single most original contribution to Marxist theory. It gives a detailed account of the development of capitalism out of feudalism through distinctive phases of usury, merchant, manufacturing and industrial capitalism, and attempts to place differing regions of the country and different trades along this progression. August Publication in Geneva of Akselrod's influential programmatic statement Present Tasks and Tactics of the Russian Social Democrats (in Harding, 1983, pp. 227--41). November At the First Congress of the Union of Social Democrats Abroad, the veteran Emancipation of Labour Group is defeated by the 'young' opposition. 1899 March Publication of Lenin's The Development of Capitalism in Russia. Eduard Bernstein publishes his seminal revisionist book The Preconditions of Socialism and the Tasks of Social Democracy (English translation entitled Evolutionary Socialism). Spring Publication of E. D. Kuskova's Credo, the first manifestation of revisionism in Russia (in Harding, 1983, pp. 250-3). This pro- voked an angry riposte by Lenin, A Protest by Russian Social Democrats, 4, 171-82. September Publication of the 'Separate Supplement' to Rabochaya Mysl (Workers Thought) no. 7 - 284 Appendix 1 the most developed statement or Russian revisionism (extracts from its leading article in Harding, 1983, pp. 242-50). 1900 January Lenin's term of exile ends. February-July Much travelling between social democratic centres in Russia to establish connections for the publication of an 'orthodox' newspaper to counter the influence of 'revisionist' journals such as Rabochaya Mysl and to prepare for a Second Party Congress. May Day Large-scale street demonstrations in Kharkhov. August Lenin in Zurich for discussions with Plekhanov and Akselrod for the publication of a new journal Iskra (The Spark). 11 December First issue of Iskra appears, edited by Lenin and carrying his leading article, 'The Urgent Tasks of Our Movement', 4, 366--71 which broached many of the ideas later elaborated in What Is To Be Done? 1901 January-March Composes a series of articles for Iskra and Zarya (The Dawn) outlining the need for comprehensive reorganisation of the party for it to fulfil its role as leader of the democratic revolution. May Day Widespread demonstrations throughout Russia culminating in the pitched battle of the Obukhov Defence in St Petersburg. 1902 Throughout the year constant editorial work for Iskra; organising Iskra representatives for forthcoming Second Party Congress. February-March Writes his The Agrarian Programme of Russian Social Democracy, 6, 109-150. March Publication in Stuttgart of What Is To Be Done?, 5, 349-520. This was intended (and used) as the common platform of the veteran leadership of Iskra in their battle for predominance at the Second Party Congress. It stressed the centrality of the all­ Russia struggle against tsarism and the consequent need for a centralised, disciplined, and professionally organised party whose leading core would be the editorial board of the party newspaper. 1903 Continuing editorial and journalistic work for Iskra; leading role on the Organising Chronology of Events/Lenin's Writings 285 Committee established to oversee the convocation of the Party Congress. March-June Strikes and demonstrations on unprecedented scale in most major cities, particularly prolonged in the south. June-July Drafts standing orders and agenda, prepares draft rules and resolutions for forthcoming Congress. 17 July Second Congress of Russian Social Democratic Labour Party convened in Brussels; Lenin elected vice-chairman. 24 July Congress moves to London. 2 August Speaks on his formulation of Article 1 of the Party Rules (defining the conditions for membership); Martov's rival formulation is carried (extracts from this debate in Harding, 1983, pp. 279-87). 2 or 3 August Iskra caucus splits over candidates for election to Central Committee. 7 August Fierce debate over composition of editorial board of party newspaper. Lenin supported by Plekhanov; their adherents now take title Bolsheviki (men of the majority); the minority, with Martov as their principal spokesman, now known as Mensheviki. 19 October Lenin resigns from editorial board of Iskra over Plekhanov's decision to expand the editorial board to include the three editors ousted at the Second Congress. 1904 February Outbreak of Russo-Japanese War; constant polemics within the party throughout the year; Lenin reviews the crisis of the Second Congress and its aftermath in One Step Forward, Two Steps Back, 7, 205--425. July The 'new' Menshevik-dominated Iskra publishes Rosa Luxemburg's Organisational Questions of Russian Social Democracy, in which she concludes that Lenin's 'concept of organisation presents the greatest danger to Russian Social Democracy' (in Harding, 1983, pp. 295-309). November Zemstvo Conference of local government activists; Russian liberals begin to stir. December Fall of Port Arthur to Japanese; general strike in Baku. 1905 9 January Bloody Sunday; Father Gapon leads huge, peaceful demonstration to the tsar's Winter Palace in St Petersburg massacre of 286 Appendix 1 hundreds by Guards regiments; massive strike movement begins; Lenin calls for determined revolutionary action to overthrow tsar. 12-17 April Third Congress of RSDLP; Lenin speaks of need for armed uprising, relations with peasantry and nature of future revolutionary government. June-July Writes his Two Tactics of Social Democracy
Recommended publications
  • Jewish Socialists Around Vpered1

    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.
  • Boris Kolonitskii, “'Democracy' in the Political Consciousness of The

    Boris Kolonitskii, “'Democracy' in the Political Consciousness of The

    "Democracy" in the Political Consciousness of the February Revolution Author(s): Boris Ivanovich Kolonitskii Source: Slavic Review, Vol. 57, No. 1 (Spring, 1998), pp. 95-106 Published by: Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2502054 . Accessed: 17/09/2013 09:58 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp . JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. Association for Slavic, East European, and Eurasian Studies is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Slavic Review. http://www.jstor.org This content downloaded from 128.197.27.9 on Tue, 17 Sep 2013 09:58:33 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions "Democracy" in the Political Consciousness of the FebruaryRevolution Boris Ivanovich Kolonitskii Historians of quite diverging orientations have interpreted the Feb- ruary revolution of 1917 in Russia as a "democratic" revolution. Sev- eral generations of Marxists of various stripes (tolk) have called it a "bourgeois-democratic revolution." In the years of perestroika, the contrast between democratic February and Bolshevik October became an important part of the historical argument of the anticommunist movement. The February revolution was regarded as a dramatic, un- successful attempt at the modernization and westernization of Russia, as its democratization.
  • The Anti-Authoritarian Chَros

    The Anti-Authoritarian Chَros

    E. DIMITRIS KITIS The Anti-Authoritarian Chóros A Space for Youth Socialization and Radicalization in Greece (1974–2010) he Balkan historian Mark Mazower, highlighting that there is a conundrum posed by anarchist groups in Greece, observed: “We Thave, to my knowledge, no serious study of this subject, nor of the ways labels, such as ␣␯␣␳␹␫␬␱´ι (anarchists) and ␣␯␶␫␧␰␱␷␴␫␣␴␶␧´␵ (anti- authoritarians) have been deployed sometimes by people in their own name and others by their opponents.”1 The purpose of this article is to address this question and give a preliminary genealogy of the anarchist phenomenon in Greece since 1974. The history of Greece since World War II includes a civil war (1946–49), which unofficially started before the liberation of the country from the Axis powers, and a military dictatorship (1967–74). These watershed events occurred in the backdrop of a vicious rift between rightists and leftists that permeated the whole of Greek society for the rest of the Cold War. The article sets out to examine the origins (and the makings) of a particular type of disaffection that developed among youth during the period of the Metapolitefsi. The Metapolitefsi, which is the time frame for this article, was the historical period after the fall of the military dictatorship in Greece (1974) that was marked by liberalization or democratization and greater integration into Europe. It is important to note that the fall of the dictatorship was precipitated by the Polytechnic Journal for the Study of Radicalism, Vol. 9, No. 1, 2015, pp. 1–36. ISSN 1930-1189 © 2015 Michigan State University.
  • Revolution in Real Time: the Russian Provisional Government, 1917

    Revolution in Real Time: the Russian Provisional Government, 1917

    ODUMUNC 2020 Crisis Brief Revolution in Real Time: The Russian Provisional Government, 1917 ODU Model United Nations Society Introduction seventy-four years later. The legacy of the Russian Revolution continues to be keenly felt The Russian Revolution began on 8 March 1917 to this day. with a series of public protests in Petrograd, then the Winter Capital of Russia. These protests But could it have gone differently? Historians lasted for eight days and eventually resulted in emphasize the contingency of events. Although the collapse of the Russian monarchy, the rule of history often seems inventible afterwards, it Tsar Nicholas II. The number of killed and always was anything but certain. Changes in injured in clashes with the police and policy choices, in the outcome of events, government troops in the initial uprising in different players and different accidents, lead to Petrograd is estimated around 1,300 people. surprising outcomes. Something like the Russian Revolution was extremely likely in 1917—the The collapse of the Romanov dynasty ushered a Romanov Dynasty was unable to cope with the tumultuous and violent series of events, enormous stresses facing the country—but the culminating in the Bolshevik Party’s seizure of revolution itself could have ended very control in November 1917 and creation of the differently. Soviet Union. The revolution saw some of the most dramatic and dangerous political events the Major questions surround the Provisional world has ever known. It would affect much Government that struggled to manage the chaos more than Russia and the ethnic republics Russia after the Tsar’s abdication.
  • Lenin, What Is to Be Done.Indd

    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.
  • 1 a New Political Dawn: the Cuban Revolution in the 1960S

    1 a New Political Dawn: the Cuban Revolution in the 1960S

    Notes 1 A New Political Dawn: The Cuban Revolution in the 1960s 1. For an outline of the events surrounding the Padilla Affair, see chapter two. 2. Kenner and Petras limited themselves to mentioning the enormous importance of a Cuban Revolution with which a great number of the North American New Left identified. They also dedicated their book to the Cuban and Vietnamese people for “giving North Americans the possibility of making a revolution” (1972: 5). 3. For an explanation of the term gauchiste and of its relevance to the New Left, see chapter six. 4. However, this consideration has been rather critical in the case of Minogue (1970). 5. The general consensus seems to be that, as the Revolution entered a period of rapid Sovietization following the failure of the ten million ton sugar harvest of 1970, Western intellectuals, who until then had showed support, sought to distance themselves from the Revolution. The single incident that seemingly sparked this reaction, in particular from some French intellectuals, was the Padilla Affair. 6. Here a clear distinction must be made mainly between the Communist Party of the pre-Revolutionary period, the Partido Socialista Popular (Popular Socialist Party) and the 26 July Movement (MR26). The former had a legacy of Popular Frontism, collaboration with Batista in the post- War period and a general distrust of “middle class adventurers” as it referred to the leadership of MR26 until 1958 (Karol, 1971: 150). The latter, led by Castro, had a radical though incoherently articulated ideo- logical basis. The process of unification of revolutionary organizations carried out between 1961 and 1965 did not completely obliterate the individuality of these competing discourses and it was in their struggle for supremacy that the New Left’s contribution was made.
  • Socialism in One Country” Promoting National Identity Based on Class Identification

    Socialism in One Country” Promoting National Identity Based on Class Identification

    “Socialism in One Country” Promoting National Identity Based on Class Identification IVAN SZPAKOWSKI The Russian Empire of the Romanovs spanned thousands of miles from the Baltic to the Pacific, with a population of millions drawn from dozens of ethnic groups. Following the Russian Civil War, the Bolsheviks inherited the problem of holding together such a heterogeneous body. At the same time, they were forced to uphold Marxist ideology demanding worldwide revolution of the proletariat while facing the reality that despite the turmoil following the First World War no such revolution was forthcoming. In 1924 the rising Joseph Stalin, along with Nikolai Bukharin, devised the theory of “Socialism in One Country” which would become the solution to many of these problems facing the Bolsheviks. First of all, it proclaimed the ability of socialism to succeed in the Soviet Union alone, without foreign aid. Additionally, it marked a change from Lenin’s policy of self-determination for the Soviet Union’s constituent nations to Stalin’s policy of a compulsory unitary state. These non-Russian ethnics were systematically and firmly incorporated into the Soviet Union by the promotion of a proletariat class mentality. The development of the theory and policy of “Socialism in One Country” thus served to forge the unitary national identity of the Soviet Union around the concept of common Soviet class identity. The examination of this policy’s role in building a new form of national identity is dependant on a variety of sources, grouped into several subject areas. First, the origin of the term “Socialism in One Country,” its original meaning and its interpretation can be found in the speeches and writings of prominent contemporary communist leaders, chief among them: Stalin and Trotsky.
  • A Critical and Comparative Analysis of Organisational Forms of Selected Marxist Parties, in Theory and in Practice, with Special Reference to the Last Half Century

    A Critical and Comparative Analysis of Organisational Forms of Selected Marxist Parties, in Theory and in Practice, with Special Reference to the Last Half Century

    Rahimi, M. (2009) A critical and comparative analysis of organisational forms of selected Marxist parties, in theory and in practice, with special reference to the last half century. PhD thesis. http://theses.gla.ac.uk/688/ Copyright and moral rights for this thesis are retained by the author A copy can be downloaded for personal non-commercial research or study, without prior permission or charge 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 Glasgow Theses Service http://theses.gla.ac.uk/ [email protected] A critical and comparative analysis of organisational forms of selected Marxist parties, in theory and in practice, with special reference to the last half century Mohammad Rahimi, BA, MSc Submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of PhD Centre for the Study of Socialist Theory and Movement Faculty of Law, Business and Social Science University of Glasgow September 2008 The diversity of the proletariat during the final two decades of the 20 th century reached a point where traditional socialist and communist parties could not represent all sections of the working class. Moreover, the development of social movements other than the working class after the 1960s further sidelined traditional parties. The anti-capitalist movements in the 1970s and 1980s were looking for new political formations.
  • The Bolshevik-Menshevik Split in July 1903, Fifty-Seven Delegates to The

    The Bolshevik-Menshevik Split in July 1903, Fifty-Seven Delegates to The

    The Bolshevik-Menshevik Split In July 1903, fifty-seven delegates to the Second Congress of the Russian Social-Democratic Labor Party (RSDLP) assembled in a flea-ridden flour warehouse in Brussels. Plekhanov, the respected veteran Russian Marxist, was elected chairman, but the delegates felt uneasy in Belgium and moved to London, where the authorities could be relied on to ignore them. The meetings were extremely argumentative, with endless hair-splitting as every tiny point was dissected and analyzed. It became clear that the party was split between two groups, the Bolsheviks (‘majority’) and the Mensheviks (‘minority’). The Bolsheviks claimed the name after getting their way in a dispute over control of the editorial board of the Party newspaper, Iskra (‘the Spark’ – which was to ‘start a big blaze’). The Mensheviks unwisely accepted the title of minority group, though they were actually more often in the majority. Both groups were enthusiastic for the destruction of capitalism and the overthrow of the Tsarist regime, but the Mensheviks, led by Martov, favored a large, loosely organized democratic party whose members could agree to differ on many points. They were prepared to work with the different political parties in Russia and they had scruples about the use of violence. The Bolsheviks, led by Lenin, were hardline revolutionaries who would not have known a scruple if they stumbled over it. Lenin had no time for democracy and no confidence in the masses. He wanted a small, tightly organized, strictly disciplined party of full-time members who did what they were told and followed the party line in every particular detail.
  • Neoliberalism and Depoliticisation in the Academy: Understanding the ‘New Student Rebellions’ Leon Sealey-Huggins and André Pusey

    Neoliberalism and Depoliticisation in the Academy: Understanding the ‘New Student Rebellions’ Leon Sealey-Huggins and André Pusey

    Graduate Journal of Social GJSS Science Neoliberalism and Depoliticisation in the Academy: Understanding the ‘New Student Rebellions’ Leon Sealey-Huggins and André Pusey Since 2009 there has been an upsurge in political activity in and around the UK, as well as in some European and American universities. These ‘new student rebellions’ have displayed levels of radicalism and po- litical activism seemingly unprecedented among recent generations of students. Broadly speaking, the intensification of this activity can be understood as being directly related to ongoing neoliberal reforms of education, a process intensified by the global financial crisis. In this article we seek to consider some of the detail of the emergence of these rebellions, and argue that they can be interpreted as part of resistance to the neoliberal tendencies in contemporary social life. As such, we argue that a depoliticised tendency accompanies the introduc- tion of, and resistance to, neoliberal mechanisms in Higher Education (HE). As activists in groups who have adopted more creative and ex- plicitly politically antagonistic forms of activism, we suggest that such forms might be more productive arenas for our energies if we want to challenge the neoliberal and depoliticised root causes of these con- flicts. Keywords: Post-politics, Neoliberalism, Higher Education, NUS, Student Protest, Creative Resistance. The image of the future is chang- duced precarity (Compagna 2013; ing for the current generation of Southwood 2011; Standing 2011). young people, haunted by the spec- Young people are not the only ones tre of the ‘graduate with no future’ facing increasingly precarious fu- (Mason 2011, 2012; Gillespie and tures; current government austerity Habermehl 2012).
  • Russian Emigration and British Marxist Socialism

    Russian Emigration and British Marxist Socialism

    WALTER KENDALL RUSSIAN EMIGRATION AND BRITISH MARXIST SOCIALISM Britain's tradition of political asylum has for centuries brought refugees of many nationalities to her shores. The influence both direct and indirect, which they have exerted on British life has been a factor of no small importance. The role of religious immigration has frequently been examined, that of the socialist emigres from Central Europe has so far received less detailed attention. Engels was a frequent contributor to the "Northern Star" at the time of the Chartist upsurge in the mid-icjth century,1 Marx also contributed.2 George Julian Harney and to a lesser extent other Chartist leaders were measurably influenced by their connection with European political exiles.3 At least one of the immigrants is reputed to have been involved in plans for a Chartist revolt.4 The influence which foreign exiles exerted at the time of Chartism was to be repro- duced, although at a far higher pitch of intensity in the events which preceded and followed the Russian Revolutions of March and October 1917. The latter years of the 19th century saw a marked increase of foreign immigration into Britain. Under the impact of antisemitism over 1,500,000 Jewish emigrants left Czarist Russia between 1881 and 1910, 500,000 of them in the last five years. The number of foreigners in the UK doubled between 1880 and 1901.5 Out of a total of 30,000 Russian, Polish and Roumanian immigrants the Home Office reported that no less than 8,000 had landed between June 1901 and June 1902.6 1 Mark Hovell, The Chartist Movement, Manchester 1925, p.
  • Latin American Critical Thought Latin American Critical Thought: Theory and Practice / Compilado Por Alberto L

    Latin American Critical Thought Latin American Critical Thought: Theory and Practice / Compilado Por Alberto L

    Jorge Arzate Salgado Este libro contiene una serie de trabajos que desdoblan el sentido Latin American Jorge Arzate Salgado de la pobreza como carencia, es decir, presentan las situaciones Doctor en Sociología (Universidad de Salamanca). Doctor en Sociología (Universidad de Salamanca). de pobreza en tanto que formas de vida. Para la tarea se acude al Docente e investigador en la Facultad de Ciencias Docente e investigador en la Facultad de Ciencias uso de categorías sociológicas como la de clase, género, espacio Critical Thought Políticas y Sociales de la Universidad Autónoma del Políticas y Sociales de la Universidad Autónoma del regional, etnia, estructura social. Cada texto presenta una versión Estado de México. Miembro del Sistema Nacional de Estado de México. Miembro del Sistema Nacional de crítica de lo que es la reproducción de la pobreza, por lo que ésta Investigadores. Ha publicado más de cincuenta Investigadores. Ha publicado más de cincuenta es descentrada de su orden estadístico y es colocada como Theory and Practice trabajos académicos y ha sido conferencista en trabajos académicos y ha sido conferencista en referencia a un sistema de relaciones sociales y económicas diversos países de Iberoamérica. diversos países de Iberoamérica. situadas históricamente. Los actores aparecen no sólo como reproductores pasivos de las situaciones de carencia, sino Alicia B. Gutiérrez Alicia B. Gutiérrez como sujetos activos que construyen su tiempo vital, sus Doctora en Sociología (EHSS) y Doctora en Antropología instituciones sociales y económicas,