Moscow, Mysl Publishing House. 1976. 236 p. The print run is 10,000. Price 95 kopecks.
One of the main questions of the great problem of the three revolutions in Russia is the question of the allies of the proletariat. In the revolution of 1905 - 1907, the peasantry was a vocal ally of the proletariat. They were joined by the democratic intelligentsia (which makes up the bulk of the Russian intelligentsia), who followed the slogans of the proletariat and its party. The active participation of the democratic intelligentsia in the first Russian Revolution was explained by the fact that they were deeply interested in carrying out the tasks of the bourgeois-democratic revolution.
What role did the democratic intelligentsia play in the public life of Russia when a revolutionary crisis was brewing in the country at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries and the alignment of class forces - the future participants of the revolution-was being determined? How active was its participation in the revolutionary struggle at that time? Only some of the issues of this problem attracted the attention of Soviet researchers, 1 while the problem as a whole remained insufficiently studied until recently. The monograph of Doctor of Historical Sciences, Professor of the Moscow Regional Correspondence Pedagogical Institute A.V. Ushakov is the first study where the question of the place of the democratic intelligentsia in the liberation movement is considered in a complex of all its components. Drawing on an extensive and diverse range of sources (including archival materials that were first introduced into scientific circulation), the author was able to convincingly show that the participation of the democratic intelligentsia of Russia in the revolution of 1905 - 1907 was prepared by the previous period, when the democratic layers of the intelligentsia became "an important force in the struggle against the autocracy" (p. 9), "one of the one of the allies of the proletariat in its struggle against the autocracy" (p. 214).
Drawing attention to the social heterogeneity of the Russian intelligentsia and contrasting the noble-landowner and bourgeois intelligentsia-opponents of the revolution-with the petty-bourgeois or democratic intelligentsia and the proletarian intelligentsia that has already appeared, although small in number, the author shows why it is the democratic intelligentsia that has become a participant in the revolutionary movement. He sees the reason for this in the difficult economic and legal situation of broad strata of the democratic intelligentsia (people's teachers, medical workers, middle and lower groups of state and commercial and industrial employees, students, representatives of the creative intelligentsia), which generated hatred for the existing order and a desire to change them. However, due to their petty-bourgeois nature, the democratic intelligentsia was not politically stable, and it was necessary to fight for it.
Only revolutionary social-democracy could help the political awakening of the intelligentsia and accelerate the growth of its revolutionary consciousness. And the author rightly assigns an important place to the question of the agitation and propaganda work of the Social-Democrats among the democratic intelligentsia, and to the role of V. I. Lenin in the broad development of this activity. Lenin's Iskra played an important role here, and its pages contained numerous appeals from local social-democratic organizations calling on the democratic intelligentsia to unite with the working class in the general struggle against tsarism. The forms of work of the Social Democrats among the intelligentsia were diverse. These include leaflets and proclamations from local social-Democratic committees of the RSDLP, the distribution of Marxist literature, the creation of social - democratic circles, and the use of legal organizations of the democratic intelligentsia to promote revolutionary ideas.
Much attention is paid to the question of the influence of the proletarian movement on the democratic intelligentsia of Russia. In this regard, the movement of the democratic
1 Yu. Sorin. At dawn. Essay on the revolutionary movement of the youth of the South of Russia at the beginning of the XX century. Moscow, 1958; N. A. Konstantinov. Essays on the history of secondary schools, Moscow, 1958; M. I. Matveeva. Revolutionary movement of students of Tomsk Technological Institute on the eve of the first Russian Revolution (1900-1904). "The Revolutionary Movement in Siberia and the Far East". Issue 1. Tomsk. 1960; P. S. Gusyatnikov. Revolutionary Student Movement in Russia. 1899-1907. Moscow, 1971, et al.
page 159
The intelligentsia is divided into two stages: 1895-1900 and 1901-1904. The first stage was when, according to the author, "the actions of the intelligentsia were mainly legal and professional in nature" (p.215), the second - the transition of the democratic intelligentsia to political struggle under the influence of the mass political movement of the proletariat that had begun. However, even at the first stage, the movement of the intelligentsia often acquired a political character. Protests against the reactionary order are heard at the All-Russian congresses of teachers, 2 at the first All-Russian congress of stage performers, which adopted the "democratic direction" (p. 55). Societies of doctors, veterinarians, and paramedics are being created that aim not only to provide financial assistance to their members, but also to protect their rights. Advanced artists stage the works of progressive playwrights in theaters, which, as the author rightly notes, played "a major role in shaping the revolutionary worldview of the workers" (p. 60).The paper convincingly shows that the political features of the movement of the democratic intelligentsia at the first stage were acquired under the influence of the Social Democrats. So, they were engaged in the revolutionary education of student youth. This work was also successfully carried out in special secondary educational institutions, where mainly children of workers and peasants studied (p.177). Social-democratic circles and organizations were formed in higher and secondary educational institutions, whose members carried on revolutionary propaganda and agitation not only among students, but also among the workers (p.130). The influence of social-democracy was also clearly reflected in the resolution of the 6th Pirogov Congress of Physicians (1896) on shortening the working day for workers (p.45).
A noticeable change in the character of the movement of the democratic intelligentsia begins in the early 1900s, when, under the influence of the mass political struggle of the proletariat, the protests of broad circles of the democratic intelligentsia begin to acquire a distinctly political character. This is evident in the content of its demands, in new forms and methods of struggle that are borrowed directly from the proletariat, and in joint actions with the workers. The 2nd All-Russian Congress of Teachers (December 1902-January 1903) "resulted in a vivid political demonstration" (p. 28). The 8th and 9th Pirogov Congresses of doctors (1902, 1903), the 3rd Congress of workers in technical and vocational education (1903), and the student Congress (1902) took on the same character. Even the promotion of professional demands by representatives of the democratic intelligentsia is beginning to take on a political character (pp. 111-112, 208 - 209), illegal unions are being formed (p. 49, 104, 112 - 114, 116), social-democratic groups and circles among the intelligentsia merge into large organizations (pp. 144, 192, etc.).
But the influence of the mass political movement of the proletariat was particularly profound in the application by the democratic intelligentsia of proletarian methods of struggle (strikes, meetings, gatherings, demonstrations). Strikes by doctors, public teachers, merchants, zemstvo and civil servants, students, and secondary school students became commonplace in Russia in those years. The paper presents a variety of materials that testify to the great scope of this new form of struggle of the democratic intelligentsia. Meetings and demonstrations of teachers, medical workers, employees, and students became political in nature. 38, 50 - 51, 117, 145, 153 - 154, 205, 211 etc.).
A new feature of the movement of the democratic intelligentsia is its joint actions with the workers. The book contains many facts about the combined revolutionary actions of people's teachers, medical workers, employees with workers (pp. 38, 50-51, 116-117, etc.). But students are especially friendly with the workers. The author rightly pays great attention to this issue. After all, it was one of the main tasks for the Social Democrats to attract the students, "the most sympathetic part of the intelligentsia,"3 to the side of the revolution. Of great importance was Lenin's appeal to the workers to come to the aid of the students (article "The surrender of 183 students to the soldiers"). Since 1901, joint political demonstrations of workers and students began to take place. The participation of workers in student demonstrations became more and more widespread (p. 156) and gave student demonstrations the characteristics of organization and stoicism.-
2 In 1896, the illegal 1st All-Russian Congress of People's Teachers was held in Nizhny Novgorod.
3 V. I. Lenin. PSS. Vol. 7, p. 343.
page 160
bones. Thanks to the participation of the workers in these demonstrations, the students ' political consciousness grew much faster, and they began to understand that the proletariat should be the leading force in the political struggle (p.158).
Thus, the paper traces the process of political awakening of the democratic intelligentsia in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, when it became an active participant in the growing revolutionary movement in Russia, an ally of the proletariat, and a hegemon of the revolutionary camp.
Along with the advantages, there are also disadvantages in the work. There is no clear explanation why the author identifies the period 1895-1904 in the history of the Russian intelligentsia and takes it as the subject of his research. At the beginning of this work, we should argue for the scientific importance of this period, linking it with the problem of the bourgeois-democratic revolution in Russia. At the beginning of the work, the author divides the intelligentsia into three professional groups: the spheres of material production, culture, and bureaucracy (p. 8), but nothing is said about the student youth. Meanwhile, the monograph contains special chapters on the revolutionary movement of students of higher and secondary educational institutions. Among the petty-bourgeois intelligentsia, the author includes "middle technical and medical personnel" (p. 5). However, nothing is said about their participation in the revolutionary movement of the democratic intelligentsia. Consequently, a large category of the democratic intelligentsia falls out of the author's field of vision. The book concludes that the student movement of the second half of the 90s of the XIX century was mainly academic in nature (p. 140). However, all the previous presentation and various documentary materials in this section contradict this conclusion. Such facts as the widespread social-democratic propaganda in higher educational institutions during these years, social-democratic circles and organizations, numerous student actions on political issues, and finally the use of the proletarian means of struggle in 1899 under the influence of the working-class movement-the strike (the first general student strike was held under the influence of the Social Democrats). All this testifies to the largely political character of the student movement during these years, and to the growing influence of the Social Democrats and the proletarian movement.
page 161
New publications: |
Popular with readers: |
News from other countries: |
![]() |
Editorial Contacts |
About · News · For Advertisers |
![]() 2020-2025, LIB.AM is a part of Libmonster, international library network (open map) Keeping the heritage of Armenia |