8
The Socialist-Revolutionaries and the labor movement
(the beginning of the twentieth century)
The labor movement and socialism as an idea, the desire for social
harmony developed in Europe and also in an increasingly close alliance,
did not wash off with traits of each other. The most powerful and
organized part of the labor movement – trade unions, were the result of
social activity of working class struggle for a decent position in
society. Their transformation into a class organization determined by
the struggle that they had to carry with employers and the state. At the
turn of the XIX and XX centuries, this struggle necessarily leads to the
question of subordination between trade unions and workers’ parties,
these two forms of organization of the working class.
Factor of early formation of political parties in Russia, than the trade
unions, has led to the unconditional priority over social policy, the
apparent secondary nature of trade unions within the labor movement.
Subsequently, after the wars and revolutions weakened unions quickly
lost their autonomy, and the process of nationalization was
irresistible. Wrote about this VM Chernov – leader and theoretician of
the Socialist Revolutionary Party. In this paper, “Statism, shielding
socialism”, referring to the meaning of the First World War in shaping
the new interim period between capitalism and socialism, he noted that
“It (the war) have begun and all sorts of” dictatorship “, she first
took the workers’ organizations as a service bodies to the state;
cooperation – for the organization of the food ration system,
population, trade unions – to mobilize the labor force for the
defense…” [1, pp.8].
The nascent political parties in Russia in the late XIX beginning of XX
centuries except the main desire – the seizure of political power, were
to act as intermediaries between the public and the state to accumulate
and express in their ideological and political interests installations
classes and social groups.russia’s political parties have begun to
include in its program to understand the role of the trade union
movement, and its potential use as a tool for implementing policy
objectives.
The program of the Socialist Revolutionary Party (December 1905)
proclaimed the protection of spiritual and physical strength of the
working class in the city and the countryside, increasing its ability to
continue the struggle for socialism.
Specifically allocated to the following requirements: the establishment
of the working day is not more than 8 hours and minimum wages, insurance
through the state and employers, legal protection of labor under the
supervision of factory inspection, the establishment of professional
workers’ organizations and ensure their right to participate in the
organization of labor in the factories. It also demanded “On
establishing the minimum wage under an agreement between governments and
trade unions of workers” [2, c.99].
The party of the then existing political parties, most lucidly and
simply expressed the essence of trade union activities, here sounded and
the shape of achieving a result – an agreement.
The program for the masses was attractive high social promises, but it
was utopian, as in his doctrine did not pay attention to development of
industrial production. The basis of the Socialist Revolutionary ideology
was the idea of the opportunity to highlight Russia’s road to socialism,
not waiting for the preconditions for this are created by capitalism.
SRs considered the peasantry the main force of revolution. More
effective work in the labor union area is not due to the fact that the
SR is the party of the middle strata of society – intellectuals, rich
peasants, artisans, merchants, etc., are in Belarus, for example,
accounted for 75% of the series [3, c.24].
Nevertheless, as for other Left parties, important for the SR was the
organization of the masses.
They actively participated in professional organizations and political
alliances. Their influence prevailed in the period of revolution in such
unions, such as rail, postal and telegraph employees, teachers,
officers, soldiers and sailors.
However, far more attention from the SR enjoy the peasantry. Great
contribution they have made in the establishment of non-partisan
All-Russia Union and the Labor Party in the State Duma, embracing most
of the peasants’ deputies. In rural areas, peasants formed the
brotherhood and unity.
But the peasantry party restrained fear that they have declared on
socialization will help to strengthen private property, and therefore
SRs more inclined to address the agrarian question “from above”, under
the law. Hence the practical absence of the peasants in the Socialist
Revolutionary governing bodies.
The defeat of the leftist forces in the First Russian Revolution led to
the withdrawal of the SR on the need to strengthen the work in the mass
organizations of workers. It turned out the same way that the passion of
terror, the main tool in the fight against autocracy, has not led to
significant results in the fight against autocracy. As a result, the SRs
have a more balanced policy for the approval of its influence in labor
organizations.
According to the Central Bureau of the St. Petersburg Trade Unions in
1907, the SR of the Board were in 9 out of 36, and in 1909 in 6 of 25
unions. This is explained by the fact that the Socialist Party
leadership supported the slogan of “neutrality” of the trade unions.
Socialists – the revolutionaries argued partisanship unions could lead
to a split in the union movement. The London conference of the SR in
1908 affirmed: “for the sake of breadth and unity of the movement” must
be upheld “complete non-partisan and independent organization of its
kind” [4, c.23].
Socialists – the revolutionaries came to a conclusion about the
equivalence of the Party and trade unions. They, in their view, are
equivalent in the sense of setting historical targets and ultimate
goals, and the unions are also entitled to consider themselves as the
best fighter and a representative of the entire working class. SRs
confused two different concepts: the partisanship of trade unions and
whether they have specific tasks in the labor movement. They believed
that the Party and trade unions have one goal, and the ways and means of
achieving it are different. The thesis of “union neutrality” evoked
criticism from the left wing RSDLP – the Bolsheviks, who believe that
the main task of trade unions struggle to improve the economic situation
of the working class and the political party of the proletariat – the
struggle for full political emancipation. SRs same as denying the
primacy of the working class, saw their task in strengthening the impact
of cooperatives (especially rural), which is associated with their
program of “socialization of the land.”
Now to the thesis of equivalence between the Party and the trade unions
and cooperatives were added. It is this triad – the Party, trade unions,
cooperatives could in their view, to create prerequisites for the
victory of socialism. As can be seen, in fact, all the activities of the
SR on the organization of cooperatives was in contradiction to their
stated motto “neutrality” of the mass organizations of workers. Thus,
the trade unions were the Social Democrats to organize the masses of
workers, socialist-revolutionaries used the same purposes cooperatives.
Regarding the forms of work in labor organizations (cooperatives,
insurance, cultural and educational societies, etc), the most
controversial in the SR were the Bolsheviks. They argued that the
workers outreach and education is more important than economic. The
Bolsheviks needed a maximum politicization of the masses. Therefore, in
societies where the first and foremost cultural and political activity,
dominated by the Bolsheviks. The effect of the SR was more substantial
and constant cooperation. More than 32% of the vote in Belarus gathered
Revolutionaries, largely through co-operatives for elections to the
Constituent Assembly of Russia, and is given the strong position of the
Bolsheviks in the army, which had an important impact on the election of
[5, c.11].
After the overthrow of autocracy, the SR party feels a huge surge in the
number of members, which is explained as an eclectic program, and the
active work of the party itself. In the spring of 1917 the party became
a mass and the number of its members reached an estimated 500 to 700
thousand [6, c.301].
However, variegated social terms, which include workers, peasants,
soldiers, intellectuals, civil servants, students, they had little
understanding of the theory of SR. The Party and before that, was not
quite the ideological and tactical unity and organizational strength,
has become even more precarious.
After the February Revolution Revolutionaries had the opportunity to
really influence the current policy of the coalition provisional
government. All representatives of the SR party participated in three
coalition governments. However, the ambivalence and inconsistency in
addressing major issues of the revolution led the party to a grave
crisis. They advocated the continuation of the war. It was believed that
the land issue can be resolved only by the Constituent Assembly. Do not
take the Bolshevik slogan ‘All Power to the Soviets!”
The contradiction between the socialist doctrinaire Socialist and
democratic interests and the mood of the masses more stronger. As the
political situation in the country worsened, and differences in the
Socialist Party.
Radical changes in the country had lost its pace, and the party became
increasingly embroiled in coalition politics.
On the eve of the Bolshevik Revolution Party – its top leadership and
local organizations were in a state of confusion and disorganization.
The Left SRs, more organizationally consolidated, not only supported the
Bolsheviks in Petrograd, but also in several other places. However, in
situations when, after October 1917 the SR had not oppose autocracy, the
regime and their related goals of the Socialist Party, the Bolsheviks
also declared the socialization of land, the party’s influence began to
fall. Its massive job loses effectiveness and also because the peasants,
workers and soldiers experiencing the euphoria of the Bolshevik decrees,
speeches, SRs have not listened to the onetime enthusiasm and
confidence.
The final point in a dramatic story Socialist-Revolutionary Party was
set in 1937 – forged deed “National Center” in which all members of the
Revolutionary Party had been declared hostile members of the Soviet
system, the organization with all the ensuing consequences.
Completed its work, one of the most influential and oldest left-wing
parties in Russia, an important component of theoretical doctrine, which
is the terror. From him, she herself died, only with the help of another
political force, which happened at that historic moment stronger.
Thus, past experience interesting contemporaries at the time of
transition from a rigid one party dictatorship to a multiparty system.
The leader of the emerging new political parties should be familiar with
the lessons of party building at the turn of XIX and XX century.
The existing political parties are small, have a weak social base. They
have not learned to overcome and stop the intra-party crises, possess
rudiments of compromise, to take into account in their work of other
public organizations.
We have not developed and today the classical scheme of arrangement of
political forces, ie formation of left and right blocks with a
traditional center.
It is therefore quite reasonable and relevant is the topic of this
conference to help understand the state of the place and role of civil
society in the country, the degree of state involvement in this process,
more efficient use of capacity on existing political, social, and other
amateur organizations in the development of the Belarusian society.
Literature
1. Chernov, VM Statism, Socialism shielding / Chernov // Historical
Archive. – 2008. – № 1 – P.3-23.
2. October 1917 and the fate of political apposition. Part I. Ed. EM
Entin – Gomel: BANTU – 1993. – 255p.
3. Gistoryya Belarusi: a 6 tons / Red calories: M. Kastsyuk (gal. Red)
[I insh.] – Мiнск: Ekaperspektyva, 2002-2005. – Vol.6. kn. I:
Satsyyalisty-revalyutsyyanery / A. Warab ‘еў [i insh.] – 2001 – 592p.
4. Non-proletarian parties of Russia in June 1907 – February 1917g. g.
Ed. EM Entin – Gomel: BANTU – 1991. – 164s.
5. Gistoryya Belarusi: a 6 tons / Red calories: M. Kastsyuk (gal. Red)
[I insh.] – Мiнск: Ekaperspektyva, 2000-2005. – Vol.6. kn. II: Устаноўчы
Ret at Rasii – / A. Urbanovich – 2003 – 616s.
6. Spirin, LI The collapse of the landlord and bourgeois parties in
Russia / LI Spirin. – M. 1977. with.301.
Нашли опечатку? Выделите и нажмите CTRL+Enter
