Peasant Land Reform, Representation and Civil Rights: the Development of Constitutional Thought in the Zemstvos in Russia, 1905-1907

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Peasant Land Reform, Representation and Civil Rights: the Development of Constitutional Thought in the Zemstvos in Russia, 1905-1907 Peasant Land Reform, Representation and Civil Rights: The Development of Constitutional Thought in the Zemstvos in Russia, 1905-1907 Thomas Jones MA by Research The University Of York History September 2013 2 ABSTRACT This paper examines constitutional political opinions among the members of provincial and district zemstvos in Russia, in order to explain this group’s rejection of liberal political parties in the first two Dumas. It finds that the rejection of these parties was not entirely synonymous with a rejection of liberal constitutional ideas among the zemstvo rank and file, who exhibited support for constitutionalism in three main areas. Firstly, arguments advanced against land expropriation among the zemstvo rank and file were based upon the desire to reinforce economic individualism amongst the peasantry, which was considered to be an essential basis for a constitutional regime. Secondly, the zemstvo rank and file supported a Duma elected upon a restricted franchise that would play a role in the political modernization of the peasantry in order to encourage norms of constructive political participation and reduce the popularity of extremist parties. Finally, government repression was criticized on the basis that it contravened notions of law and due process. Evidence from the southern provinces suggests that repression was valued for its role in restoring law and order, although the legality of the repression was still criticized. These findings suggest that the landed nobility who made up the majority of the members of the provincial and district zemstvos were more supportive of constitutional reform in Russia than has previously been suggested, which is significant to historical debates surrounding the stability of the tsarist regime before the First World War. 3 CONTENTS AUTHOR’S DECLARATION ..................................................................................................... 5 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................ 6 The Zemstvos in 1905 ................................................................................................... 7 Zemstvo Activity up to 1905 ....................................................................................... 10 Current Historiography ................................................................................................ 13 A Note on the Sources ................................................................................................. 19 THE CRISIS OF PEASANT AGRICULTURE AND THE ZEMSTVO ALTERNATIVE TO LAND EXPROPRIATION ......................................................................................................... 27 Individual Economic Effort and the ‘Crisis’ in Peasant Agriculture .......................... 28 The Land Hunger and the Political Priorities of the Peasantry ................................... 38 Alternatives to Land Expropriation ............................................................................. 45 Conclusion ................................................................................................................... 52 REPRESENTATION, GOVERNMENT, AND THE ‘ZEMSKY SOBOR’ .............................. 55 The ‘Zemsky Sobor’ .................................................................................................... 57 The ‘Zemsky Sobor’ and the Political Evolution of Russia ........................................ 64 Conclusion ................................................................................................................... 72 THE IMPORTANCE OF CIVIL RIGHTS IN THE PROVINCES FOR A CONSTITUTIONAL REGIME ..................................................................................................................................... 75 Russian Law and Civil Rights ..................................................................................... 77 The Importance of Due Process and Consistent Application of the Law.................... 80 The Importance of the Structure of Constitutionalism ................................................ 84 Repression and the Brutalization of Society ............................................................... 86 Conclusion ................................................................................................................... 91 4 CHANGING ATTITUDES TOWARDS REPRESSION IN THE SOUTHERN PROVINCES: UTILITY VERSUS LONG TERM INSTABILITY................................................................... 93 Criticisms of Repression ............................................................................................. 96 Recognition of the Utility of Repression ................................................................... 104 The Lack of Consensus on Repression ...................................................................... 108 Conclusion ................................................................................................................. 110 CONCLUSION ......................................................................................................................... 112 BIBLIOGRAPHY ..................................................................................................................... 117 5 AUTHOR’S DECLARATION I declare that, except where explicit reference is made to the contribution of others, this dissertation is the result of my own work and has not been submitted for any other degree at The University of York or any other institution. INTRODUCTION In March 1906 the British vice-consul to Odessa, V. H. Bosanquet, reported that there had been widespread peasant unrest in Saratov province as a result of the chronic shortage of land available to the peasants. The following account of an example of the resulting governmental repression was established by Bosanquet on the basis of accounts from landowners who had fled to the local towns. Cossacks were sent to suppress the disorders, and they have seemed to have flogged the peasants mercilessly. I was told of a case where Cossacks (by order of the zemstvo nachalnik, if I remember right) beat the peasants of the soles of their feet so severely that some died and others were taken to hospital. I was further informed that many peasants had been killed by Cossacks.1 This report of brutal government action in the provinces is indicative of a new trend in political thought among the aristocratic landed proprietors of Russia’s provinces. Accounts of brutal punishment resulting in the death of peasants is presented as illegitimate, especially as it was carried out arbitrarily on the orders of the zemstvo nachalnik, or land captain, a representative of the tsarist bureaucracy in the countryside. This represents an interesting concern for the due operation of law and order in the countryside, even where repression was acting in the landowners’ interests. In asserting the right of the peasantry to enjoy the due process of the law, this passage also raises the possibility that the peasantry were also thought of to deserve rights and freedoms that citizens of a constitutional regime would be entitled to. This dissertation will examine the rejection of the Kadet and Octobrist parties among the provincial and district zemstvos in 1906 during the revolution of 1905-1907. In almost a single stroke, in that year’s zemstvo elections most Kadet deputies lost the seats in the zemstvos. By the end of the decade, the Kadets had been completely eliminated from the zemstvos, after their leaders had dominated the gentry’s opposition within the zemstvos up to the formation of political parties. The political opinions of the zemstvo rank and file during the revolution of 1905 to 1907 will be studied in order to determine whether this rejection of liberal political parties represented a rejection of liberal and constitutional politics by the zemstvo rank and file, or if a more complex 1 The National Archives, Kew, FO 881/8755, no. 22, Vice-Consul V. H. Bosanquet to Consul-General C. Smith, March 12 1906, 64. 7 picture emerges where the zemstvo rank and file merely rejected the particular Kadet brand of liberalism, retaining aspects of support for constitutional reform for Russia. The revolutionary period of 1905-1907, in which this investigation will be situated, arguably set the precedent for the interaction and cooperation between the emerging civil society and the state in order to implement constitutional reform. Faced with revolutionary uprisings in major urban centers, rampant peasant unrest in the countryside, and organized campaigns for constitutional reform from educated sections of society, the government granted the concession of the Duma along with new laws for greater accountability of government to Russian society. The extent to which constitutional reform resulted in an increase in cooperation between civil society and the Russian government can be investigated by studying the development of constitutional thought in the zemstvos, with a view to establishing if there existed a movement for moderate political change that would have been compatible with the Russian government. The Zemstvos in 1905 The zemstvo rank and file represented a minority of the Russian population. However, it should not be assumed that this group was homogeneous in its social and political outlook. There existed a variety of different opinions on the welfare of the peasantry, civil liberties, and the role of a representative institution within this group, alongside significant
Recommended publications
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • An Old Believer ―Holy Moscow‖ in Imperial Russia: Community and Identity in the History of the Rogozhskoe Cemetery Old Believers, 1771 - 1917
    An Old Believer ―Holy Moscow‖ in Imperial Russia: Community and Identity in the History of the Rogozhskoe Cemetery Old Believers, 1771 - 1917 Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Doctoral Degree of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Peter Thomas De Simone, B.A., M.A Graduate Program in History The Ohio State University 2012 Dissertation Committee: Nicholas Breyfogle, Advisor David Hoffmann Robin Judd Predrag Matejic Copyright by Peter T. De Simone 2012 Abstract In the mid-seventeenth century Nikon, Patriarch of Moscow, introduced a number of reforms to bring the Russian Orthodox Church into ritualistic and liturgical conformity with the Greek Orthodox Church. However, Nikon‘s reforms met staunch resistance from a number of clergy, led by figures such as the archpriest Avvakum and Bishop Pavel of Kolomna, as well as large portions of the general Russian population. Nikon‘s critics rejected the reforms on two key principles: that conformity with the Greek Church corrupted Russian Orthodoxy‘s spiritual purity and negated Russia‘s historical and Christian destiny as the Third Rome – the final capital of all Christendom before the End Times. Developed in the early sixteenth century, what became the Third Rome Doctrine proclaimed that Muscovite Russia inherited the political and spiritual legacy of the Roman Empire as passed from Constantinople. In the mind of Nikon‘s critics, the Doctrine proclaimed that Constantinople fell in 1453 due to God‘s displeasure with the Greeks. Therefore, to Nikon‘s critics introducing Greek rituals and liturgical reform was to invite the same heresies that led to the Greeks‘ downfall.
    [Show full text]
  • Peter Chaadaev: Between the Love of Fatherland and the Love of Truth
    PETER CHAADAEV: BETWEEN THE LOVE OF FATHERLAND AND THE LOVE OF TRUTH BOOK OF ABSTRACTS International Conference Krakow Meetings 2016 June 5–8, 2016 Benedictine Abbey in Tyniec, Krakow, Poland ORGANIZERS: Pontifical University of John Paul II in Krakow Instituto de Filosofia Edith Stein in Granada International Center for the Study of the Christian Orient in Granada HONORARY PATRONAGE: Council of European Bishops’ Conferences INVITED SPEAKERS: Andrzej Walicki (Warsaw) Bernard Marchadier (Paris) Fr. Georgy Orekhanov (Moscow) Regula Zwahlen (Fribourg) ACADEMIC BOARD: Teresa Obolevitch (Krakow) Artur Mrówczyński-Van Allen (Granada) Paweł Rojek (Krakow) CONFERENCE SECRETARY: Olga Tabatadze (Granada) Gennadii Aliaiev Poltava Yuri Kondratuk National Technical University, Ukraine THE TRUTH OF PATRIOTISM OR THE PATRIOTISM OF THE TRUTH What does it make the inner tension of the title question? It is obvious—at least for rational thinking—that the truth is a predicate that describes the universal, as the patriotism is the one that describes the individual or group. There is only one truth, but there are many pa- triotisms. Within this coordinate system, we should rather talk about the patriotism of the truth: as the universal bears greater value than individual, so, first, one should be a patriot of the truth, and only thereafter a patriot of a group (the group is not necessarily a people, a nation, or a state). The patriotism of the truth is the true patriotism, as it comprises in itself or replaces itself (or subordinates under itself) the patriotism of a group as it is com- monly understood. Thus, we can read and interpret the famous words of Peter Chaadaev that the love of the truth is much more beautiful than the love of the Fatherland.
    [Show full text]
  • Background Guide, and to Issac and Stasya for Being Great Friends During Our Weird Chicago Summer
    Russian Duma 1917 (DUMA) MUNUC 33 ONLINE 1 Russian Duma 1917 (DUMA) | MUNUC 33 Online TABLE OF CONTENTS ______________________________________________________ CHAIR LETTERS………………………….….………………………….……..….3 ROOM MECHANICS…………………………………………………………… 6 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM………………………….……………..…………......9 HISTORY OF THE PROBLEM………………………………………………………….16 ROSTER……………………………………………………….………………………..23 BIBLIOGRAPHY………………………………………………………..…………….. 46 2 Russian Duma 1917 (DUMA) | MUNUC 33 Online CHAIR LETTERS ____________________________________________________ My Fellow Russians, We stand today on the edge of a great crisis. Our nation has never been more divided, more war- stricken, more fearful of the future. Yet, the promise and the greatness of Russia remains undaunted. The Russian Provisional Government can and will overcome these challenges and lead our Motherland into the dawn of a new day. Out of character. To introduce myself, I’m a fourth-year Economics and History double major, currently writing a BA thesis on World War II rationing in the United States. I compete on UChicago’s travel team and I additionally am a CD for our college conference. Besides that, I am the VP of the Delta Kappa Epsilon fraternity, previously a member of an all-men a cappella group and a proud procrastinator. This letter, for example, is about a month late. We decided to run this committee for a multitude of reasons, but I personally think that Russian in 1917 represents such a critical point in history. In an unlikely way, the most autocratic regime on Earth became replaced with a socialist state. The story of this dramatic shift in government and ideology represents, to me, one of the most interesting parts of history: that sometimes facts can be stranger than fiction.
    [Show full text]
  • Universität Bielefeld/ Университет Билефельда/ Staatliche Universität Санкт-Петербургский St
    Universität Bielefeld/ Университет Билефельда/ Staatliche Universität Санкт-Петербургский St. Petersburg государственный университет Zentrum für Deutschland- und Центр Изучения Германии и Europastudien Европы ZDES Working Papers No 1 Beyond the Nation Writing European history today Papers presented at an international workshop November 21 – 23 2003 in St. Petersburg Bielefeld, St. Petersburg 2004 ISSN 1860-5680 ZDES Working Papers Arbeitspapiere des Zentrums für Deutschland- und Europastudien Рабочие тетради Центра изучения Германии и Европы Universität Bielefeld – Fakultät für Soziologie Postfach 100131 – 33501 Bielefeld – Deutschland Staatliche Universität St. Petersburg – 7/9 Universitetskaja Nab. 199034 St. Petersburg – Russland www.zdes.spb.ru, E-Mail: [email protected] Foreword To write a European history today which is more than a simple addition of national historical narratives -- and more than a teleological description of European integration -- is a difficult but significant task. There seems to be consensus among scholars that this can only be achieved through international cooperation. Enhanced dialogue among historians from Europe’s various national discourses is important in order to move beyond new national perspectives on European history. It can also enhance discussion about the varieties of historical development within Europe and the different ways to describe them. In this context, it seems essential not only to intensify dialogue among historians within the newly enlarged European Union but also to integrate colleagues from Russia and Eastern Europe into the discussion. Only if the history of the Eastern part of the continent is included in the general picture of European history will it be possible to develop a new pan-European historical narrative which reflects the true variety of its diverse paths and developments.
    [Show full text]
  • Hamburgm CV 2019
    Name: Gary Michael Hamburg Office: History Department Home, Claremont: 468 Potomac Way 850 Columbia Avenue Claremont, CA 91711 Claremont McKenna College Home, South Bend: 1430 East Wayne St. Claremont, CA 91711 South Bend, IN 46615 (909) 624-6490. (574) 261-5271 cell. Email: [email protected] Education: A.B. with distinction, Stanford University, 1972; A.M. in History, Stanford University, 1974; Ph.D. in History, Stanford University, 1978. Foreign study at Leningrad State University, USSR, 1971-1972 (Fall Semester) and 1975- 1976 (Academic Year); at Moscow University, 1986; in Moscow, 1992. Employment and Teaching: Teaching and Research Fellow, Stanford University, 1977-1978; Assistant Professor of History, Cornell College, 1978-1979; Assistant Professor of History, University of Notre Dame, 1979-1985; Associate Professor, University of Notre Dame, 1985-1993; Professor of History, University of Notre Dame, 1993 to 2004; Recipient, Kaneb Award for Outstanding Teaching, University of Notre Dame, 2003. Otto M. Behr Professor of European History, Claremont McKenna College, 2004 to present. Roy P. Crocker Award for Merit (awarded by the faculty), 2011 – 2012. Honors and Fellowships: Sloan Scholar, Stanford University, 1968-1972; Phi Beta Kappa, 1972; IREX/Fulbright-Hays Fellow, 1975-1976; Maybelle MacLeod Lewis Fellow, 1977; IREX/Fulbright-Hays Fellow, 1986; National Endowment for the Humanities, Translation Grant, 1989 – 1990; Marc Raeff Prize for Best Book in 2016, from Eighteenth-Century Russian Studies Association. Major Publications: Books: Monographs 1. Politics of the Russian Nobility 1881-1905, Rutgers University Press, Spring 1984. 299 pp. 2. Boris Chicherin and Early Russian Liberalism, 1828 - 1866, Stanford University Press, Fall 1992.
    [Show full text]
  • S:\FULLCO~1\HEARIN~1\Committee Print 2018\Henry\Jan. 9 Report
    Embargoed for Media Publication / Coverage until 6:00AM EST Wednesday, January 10. 1 115TH CONGRESS " ! S. PRT. 2d Session COMMITTEE PRINT 115–21 PUTIN’S ASYMMETRIC ASSAULT ON DEMOCRACY IN RUSSIA AND EUROPE: IMPLICATIONS FOR U.S. NATIONAL SECURITY A MINORITY STAFF REPORT PREPARED FOR THE USE OF THE COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS UNITED STATES SENATE ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION JANUARY 10, 2018 Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Relations Available via World Wide Web: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/congress/index.html U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE 28–110 PDF WASHINGTON : 2018 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800 Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001 VerDate Mar 15 2010 04:06 Jan 09, 2018 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 5012 Sfmt 5012 S:\FULL COMMITTEE\HEARING FILES\COMMITTEE PRINT 2018\HENRY\JAN. 9 REPORT FOREI-42327 with DISTILLER seneagle Embargoed for Media Publication / Coverage until 6:00AM EST Wednesday, January 10. COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS BOB CORKER, Tennessee, Chairman JAMES E. RISCH, Idaho BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, Maryland MARCO RUBIO, Florida ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin JEANNE SHAHEEN, New Hampshire JEFF FLAKE, Arizona CHRISTOPHER A. COONS, Delaware CORY GARDNER, Colorado TOM UDALL, New Mexico TODD YOUNG, Indiana CHRISTOPHER MURPHY, Connecticut JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming TIM KAINE, Virginia JOHNNY ISAKSON, Georgia EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts ROB PORTMAN, Ohio JEFF MERKLEY, Oregon RAND PAUL, Kentucky CORY A. BOOKER, New Jersey TODD WOMACK, Staff Director JESSICA LEWIS, Democratic Staff Director JOHN DUTTON, Chief Clerk (II) VerDate Mar 15 2010 04:06 Jan 09, 2018 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 5904 Sfmt 5904 S:\FULL COMMITTEE\HEARING FILES\COMMITTEE PRINT 2018\HENRY\JAN.
    [Show full text]
  • AP EUROPEAN HISTORY SUMMER READING 2021 Hollinshead, Byron and Theodore K
    AP EUROPEAN HISTORY SUMMER READING 2021 Hollinshead, Byron and Theodore K. Rabb, eds. I Wish I'd Been There, Book Two: European History: Twenty Historians Bring to Life Dramatic Events in the History of Europe. NYC: Doubleday, 2008. (Be sure to get the EUROPEAN HISTORY volume, NOT American History) Welcome to AP EUROPEAN HISTORY 2020-2021 We will use Turnitin.com (Class ID: 29408376 , Enrollment Key: According to this summer reading document, history is a(n) “____.” (all lowercase) ASSIGNMENT #1 & #2: You will read the INTRODUCTION & TEN chapters from IWIBT. HISTORY IS AN ARGUMENT. For each essay you read, summarize the ARGUMENT of the historian in a concise but comprehensive THESIS STATEMENT. These historians tend NOT to write an explicitly stated thesis. You must read & understand the overarching argument of the essay. Before you begin reading on your own, READ Richard Pipes’ “Nicholas 2 Signs the October Manifesto” THEN read the example thesis I have written below: “The signing of the October Manifesto by Nicholas II in 1905 was based on the refusal of his cousin to lead a military dictatorship, the urging of Sergei Witte, and the developing liberalization and revolutionary spirit because of the socio-economic changes and military defeats faced by Russia in the late 19th and early 20th centuries.” Be sure that the thesis statement you write for each essay is an argument, not a statement of fact, and that it encompasses major support for the argument provided in the essay. You are not required to follow a particular format for your thesis statements. In some cases, the AP-style “X.
    [Show full text]
  • Dniester Jews Between
    PARALLEL RUPTURES: JEWS OF BESSARABIA AND TRANSNISTRIA BETWEEN ROMANIAN NATIONALISM AND SOVIET COMMUNISM, 1918-1940 BY DMITRY TARTAKOVSKY DISSERTATION Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in History in the Graduate College of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 2009 Urbana, Illinois Doctoral Committee: Professor Mark D. Steinberg, Chair Professor Keith Hitchins Professor Diane P. Koenker Professor Harriet Murav Assistant Professor Eugene Avrutin Abstract ―Parallel Ruptures: Jews of Bessarabia and Transnistria between Romanian Nationalism and Soviet Communism, 1918-1940,‖ explores the political and social debates that took place in Jewish communities in Romanian-held Bessarabia and the Moldovan Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic during the interwar era. Both had been part of the Russian Pale of Settlement until its dissolution in 1917; they were then divided by the Romanian Army‘s occupation of Bessarabia in 1918 with the establishment of a well-guarded border along the Dniester River between two newly-formed states, Greater Romania and the Soviet Union. At its core, the project focuses in comparative context on the traumatic and multi-faceted confrontation with these two modernizing states: exclusion, discrimination and growing violence in Bessarabia; destruction of religious tradition, agricultural resettlement, and socialist re-education and assimilation in Soviet Transnistria. It examines also the similarities in both states‘ striving to create model subjects usable by the homeland, as well as commonalities within Jewish responses on both sides of the border. Contacts between Jews on either side of the border remained significant after 1918 despite the efforts of both states to curb them, thereby necessitating a transnational view in order to examine Jewish political and social life in borderland regions.
    [Show full text]
  • Running in Place: the Latest Round of Russian Economic Modernization
    Russia Political Economy Project RUNNING IN PLACE: THE LATEST ROUND OF RUSSIAN ECONOMIC MODERNIZATION RUSSIA POLITICAL ECONOMY PROJECT F OREIGN P OLICY R ESEARCH I NSTITUTE 1 M ARCH 2 0 1 8 The Foreign Policy Research Institute thanks the Carnegie Corporation for its support of the Russia Political Economy Project. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. © 2018 by the Foreign Policy Research Institute COVER: Matrioshka with coins, Adobe Stock. FOREIGN POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE MISSION The Foreign Policy Research Institute is dedicated to bringing the insights of scholarship to bear on the foreign policy and national security challenges facing the United States. It seeks to educate the public, teach teachers, train students, and offer ideas to advance U.S. national interests based on a nonpartisan, geopolitical perspective that illuminates contemporary international affairs through the lens of history, geography, and culture. EDUCATING THE AMERICAN PUBLIC: FPRI was founded on the premise than an informed and educated citizenry is paramount for the U.S. to conduct a coherent foreign policy. Today, we live in a world of unprecedented complexity and ever-changing threats, and as we make decisions regarding the nation’s foreign policy, the stakes could not be higher. FPRI offers insights to help the public understand this volatile world by publishing research, hosting conferences, and holding dozens of public events and lectures each year.
    [Show full text]
  • Industrial Revolution Russia(2)
    Making of Modern Europe: State, Economy and Empire Module 8 Industrialization in Russia: Role of Russian State Script The Role of the Russian state in Russia’s Industrialisation Despite the abolition of serfdom, tight regulation by the Mir prevented any growth in the mobility of labour. Thus the industrial activities meant to meet the demand generated by the demands of the agrarian communities themselves, which characterised developments in Britain and other parts of Western Europe, was virtually inexistent in the adverse conditions of the Russian countryside. As a consequence, the principal stimulus behind industrial development had to be provided by the Russian state itself. The policy of state patronage for commerce and industry to aid industrialisation in the Tsarist domains was followed by Reutern, Bunge and Vsyhnegradskii. It was finally given major thrust by the policies of Witte, Kokovstov and finally Stolypin. As a cumulative consequence of these policies, Imperial Russia was transformed from the most backward economy to one of the fastest emerging industrial economy when the Great War broke out in 1914. Till 1860, the state had not undertaken any direct measures for the promotion of trade and industry. Industry tended to be confined to gilds in the old towns of St. Petersburg, Moscow, Odessa etc, among the Old Believers (i.e. those who refused to conform to the reformed Orthodox Church of Peter the Great) and then among the among the Armenians and Georgians. The Crimean War changed the entire mindset of the Russian ruling elite in this respect. Inspired by the role played by railways in the course of German industrialisation, the newly appointed Minister of Finance, Reutern emphasised on the need for railway development to overcome the military backwardness that had come to plague imperial Russia.
    [Show full text]
  • Soviet History in the Gorbachev Revolution: the First Phase*
    SOVIET HISTORY IN THE GORBACHEV REVOLUTION: THE FIRST PHASE* R.W. Davies I. THE BACKGROUND The Khrushchev thaw among historians began early in 1956 and continued with retreats and starts for ten years. In the spring of 1956 Burdzhalov, the deputy editor of the principal Soviet historical journal, published a bold article re-examining the role of the Bolshevik party in the spring of 1917, demonstrating that Stalin was an ally of Kamenev's in compromising with the Provisional Government, and presenting Zinoviev as a close associate of en in.' The article was strongly criticised. Burdzhalov was moved to an uninfluential post, though he did manage eventually to publish an important history of the February revolution. The struggle continued; and after Khrushchev's further public denunciation of Stalin at the XXII Party Congress in 1961 there was a great flowering of publica- tions about Soviet history. The most remarkable achievement of these years was the publication of a substantial series of articles and books about the collectivisation of agriculture and 'de-kulakisation' in 1929-30, largely based on party archives. The authors-Danilov, Vyltsan, Zelenin, Moshkov and others- were strongly critical of Politburo policy in that period. Their writings were informed by a rather naive critical conception: they held that the decisions of the XVI Party Conference in April 1929, incorporating the optimum variant of the five-year plan and a relatively moderate pace of collectivisation, were entirely correct, but the November 1929 Central Committee Plenum, which speeded up collectivisation, and the decision to de-kulakise which followed, were imposed on the party by Stalin, who already exercised personal power, supported by his henchmen Molotov and Kaganovich.
    [Show full text]