Academic literature on the topic 'Russian Anarchism'
Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles
Consult the lists of relevant articles, books, theses, conference reports, and other scholarly sources on the topic 'Russian Anarchism.'
Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.
You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.
Journal articles on the topic "Russian Anarchism"
1
Damier, Vadim. "The Genoa Conference of 1922 Through the Eyes of Russian Anarchists." Novaia i noveishaia istoriia, no. 2 (2023): 86. http://dx.doi.org/10.31857/s013038640025099-6.
Full textAbstract:
In the article the author examines the attitude of Russian anarchists and anarcho-syndicalists to the 1922 Genoa Conference and the participation of representatives of Soviet Russia in it. This subject has not received much coverage in the works of anarchism scholars, who have so far focused primarily on the study of the general stance of Russian anarchism towards the Soviet regime and the issue of the New Economic Policy, on the problem of anti-anarchist repressions in Russia and on the ideological and organisational processes in the Russian anarchist emigration. The author made it his task to identify the place that the critique of the “Genoa policy” of the Soviet government enjoyed in the ideological concepts and political work of the anarchists, and to trace the main line of their reasoning. The main source for this article was the original, mainly émigré, press of the Russian anarchists between 1922 and 1923. The author demonstrates that the Russian anarchists' view of the Genoa Conference was primarily determined by ideological motives and their general analysis of the course and fate of the Russian Revolution itself. Being anti-statists, the anarchists had no particular conception of foreign policy and were indifferent to so-called state interests. The “Genoa policy” was perceived by them as a manifestation and confirmation of the new Bolshevik course, in which they saw an orientation towards restoring the positions of private capital within Russia itself and towards subordination to world capital on an international scale. Planned or real concessions on the part of the Soviet delegation at the Conference and repression of Russian anarchists and socialists were, in their eyes, two sides of the “Bolshevik counter-revolution”. The criticism of Bolshevism mounted by the anarchist emigration in connection with and after the Genoa Conference contributed to the demarcation in the international trade union revolutionary-syndicalist movement and the founding of the anarcho-syndicalist International.
2
Matyukhin, A., and S. Mezencev. "The "World Revolution" in Russian Anarchism." Journal of Political Research 7, no. 3 (October 17, 2023): 45–57. http://dx.doi.org/10.12737/2587-6295-2023-7-3-45-57.
Full textAbstract:
The purpose of this article is to identify the specifics of the theory of the "world revolution" in the ideological and political heritage of Russian anarchism. Historical, comparative, hermeneutic methods of scientific research were actively used to write the article. The ideologists of Russian anarchism in their interpretation of the "world revolution" competed with Marxist doctrine, with its popular dialectical theory of socio-economic formations and class struggle, where the final stage of historical progress was to be the achievement of global communism. Rejecting the Marxist concept of "dictatorship of the proletariat", the Russian anarchists proceeded from an alternative methodology that emphasizes the primacy of natural, biological factors of social processes. According to anarchists, the basic factor of progress is the natural inclination of people to solidarity and mutual assistance. Hence the Russian anarchists opposed the natural nature of the evolution of mankind to any "forced" forms of social organization. This applied, first of all, to the institution of the state, regardless of its external form – communist, liberal-democratic, despotic. The basic parameters of the social ideal in the theory of Russian anarchism were the principles of anarchy and freedom, the building of social existence on the basis of self-organization, self-government and a global decentralized confederation structured "from the bottom up". The former territorial and political borders were abolished, nations were abolished. The anarchists saw the achievement of this ideal as an exclusively revolutionary way, gradually embracing all new countries, regions, continents. The article emphasizes the constant appeal of Russian anarchists to the arguments of universal morality - "freedom", "justice", "brotherhood", "justice", "equality" in justifying the need for a world anarchist revolution, which in practice turned into political abstractions with destructive consequences for societies. At the same time, the "secondary" ideology of Russian anarchism as an intellectual product is noted in relation to Marxism and natural science theories of the XVIII-XIX centuries, as well as the tendency of anarchists to utopian thinking, to speculative building of their global social ideal.
3
Semiglazov, Georgiy. "Lev Chernyi’s Anarchistic Sociometry." Sociological Journal 27, no. 1 (March 26, 2021): 122–38. http://dx.doi.org/10.19181/socjour.2021.27.1.7847.
Full textAbstract:
Anarchist teachings have become popular in the modern world. Due to this fact, it is necessary to examine the history of this movement, because many important anarchists of the past are hardly known today. This article focuses on the ideas of Lev Chernyi (Pavel Dmitrievich Turchaninov), who was a Russian anarchist in the early 20th century. The author analyzes his program work “A New Direction in Anarchism: Associational Anarchism”, first published in 1907. The goal of the analysis is to introduce Chernyi not only as a dedicated anarchist, but also as a social scientist, familiar with the traditions of European sociology. Such a perspective is possible due to the terminology used by Turchaninov. In particular, the Russian anarchist divides social sciences into sociology and sociometry, defining the subject area for each field of knowledge. To reach the goal, it is necessary to answer several key questions of social sciences, namely, how Chernyi explains action, social order and social changes. The author claims that answers to these questions very well might be found in the work of Turchaninov. The conclusion is that Chernyi’s ideas are interesting not only for researchers of anarchism, but also for social scientists and philosophers, since Turchaninov has several concepts similar to the ideas of the classics of sociological thought.
4
Martynov, Mikhail. "The problem of the “border” in the anarchist discourse." Przegląd Wschodnioeuropejski 8, no. 2 (March 21, 2019): 329–39. http://dx.doi.org/10.31648/pw.3591.
Full textAbstract:
The subject of this paper is the problem of the “border” in the anarchist discourse. The analysis is based on a number of key texts written primarily by Russian anarchists from the end of the nineteenth century to the beginning of the twenty-first century. The author also examines some of the texts of contemporary American anarchism. The main attention is paid to three different aspects of the conceptualization of the “border” in the anarchist discourse: the anarchist idea of travel, the problem of the “border” in the context of the Russian languagespecific view of the world, as well as the “border” as a phenomenon of the text.
5
Gerasimov, Nikolai I. "History of mystical anarchism (problem of periodization)." Philosophy Journal 15, no. 1 (2022): 161–75. http://dx.doi.org/10.21146/2072-0726-2022-15-1-161-175.
Full textAbstract:
The article explores the problem of periodization of mystical anarchism. The author suggests that most of the disagreements between modern researchers of the creative heritage of the 20th century anarchist-mystics is related to the absence of any historical and philosophical reference point or scheme. The article suggests viewing the whole history of the development of this phenomenon as an evolution of communities of thinkers who were equally close to anarchist and mystical ideas. Three periods are distinguished: 1) 1905–1907; 2) 1917–1930; 3) 1924–1939. In each period, the author analyzes the ideological principles of a particular community of mystical anarchists, their ability to influence the cultural landscape of their era, and their conceptual relationship with their predecessors/successors. The terms “mystical anarchist” and “anarcho-mystic” are used synonymously in this text. Particular attention is paid to the emigrant period in the history of mystical anarchists (the study is based on the analysis of periodicals of the Russian diaspora in the United States).
6
Martynov, M. Yu. "“I Do not Believe in Anarchy.” To the Question of the Ideological Foundations of Egor Letov’s Works." Critique and Semiotics 38, no. 2 (2020): 388–400. http://dx.doi.org/10.25205/2307-1737-2020-2-388-400.
Full textAbstract:
The name of Egor Letov (1964–2008), one of the most famous Russian punks today, has a stable association with anarchism in the mass consciousness, with a protest against any form of power. Some of Letov’s texts and phrases (for example, “Kill the state in yourself!”) have acquired the character of precedent – they are identified and function as anarchist texts without necessarily referring to the original source. At the same time, there are elements in Letov’s works that are difficult to reconcile with an anarchist worldview, and in general, Letov’s anarchism is not obvious. For example, the theme of death, which is one of the key themes in Letov’s works, is hardly associated with anarchism, which takes the side of life. The main purpose of the article is to clarify Letov’s attitude to anarchism, to show the role and place of the anarchist worldview in his works. The author concludes that Letov’s works is either not anarchist enough (a turn towards nationalist views) or, on the contrary, too anarchist (a form of total protest). This situation is conditioned by structural peculiarities of anarchist theory. Classical anarchism has a Manichaean structure (S. Newman), as subject and power in it are clearly separated. Letov’s creativity is not anarchist in this Manichaean sense, which requires unambiguity and clarity of its elements. Despite the evasion of Manichaean binaryism, Letov’s texts are able to keep the link with anarchism. Letov’s anarchism has broader grounds and expresses a total protest against reality, which condenses freedom into a conventional communication framework, makes it predictable, and protects it from waste.
7
SHRIVERS, JOERY. "ANARCHISM AND PHENOMENOLOGY." HORIZON / Fenomenologicheskie issledovanija/ STUDIEN ZUR PHÄNOMENOLOGIE / STUDIES IN PHENOMENOLOGY / ÉTUDES PHÉNOMÉNOLOGIQUES 10, no. 2 (2021): 585–608. http://dx.doi.org/10.21638/2226-5260-2021-10-2-585-608.
Full textAbstract:
We offer an introductory article to the translation of Dutch philosopher Joery Schreivers’ work Phenomenologists and Anarchism, which deals with the reception of current foreign trajectories of phenomenological and akratic reflexions from the perspective of contemporary Russian academic discourse. In the light of this, an attempt is made to assess the significance and originality of J. Shrivers’ study, focused on the conceptual juxtaposition of two philosophical traditions: phenomenology and the philosophy of anarchism. The value of the author’s stated perspective, which provides an opportunity to revise the classical phenomenological texts, is articulated as being related to its methodological novelty—not only for the Russian-speaking space, but also for foreign philosophy; a review and analysis of the central theses of the article, related to the key figures of the line of succession of acrical reflection in the phenomenological tradition, which is outlined by the author, is given, including: M.Heidegger, R. Schürmann, E.Levinas, J.Derrida, J.-L.Nancy, J.-I.Lacoste, C.Romano and J.-L.Marion. The article also builds theoretical connections between the anarchist foundations of a number of phenomenological reflections identified by J. Schreivers and the ontological accoutrements of other current philosophical trends—for example, the actor-network theory and the polyphony of new materialisms.
8
Rowley, Alison. "An Ephemeral Look at Russian Anarchist Life in the United States." Slavonic and East European Review 102, no. 1 (January 2024): 43–65. http://dx.doi.org/10.1353/see.00003.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract: In September 1915, San Francisco resident Ernest Kundy received a picture postcard from an unnamed correspondent. Produced by the Anarchist Red Cross of Detroit, the postcard featured a depiction of the Bloody Sunday massacre which sparked Russia’s 1905 revolution and served as one of the most important episodes in the history of revolutionary martyrdom. By examining every aspect of the postcard this article reveals, layer by layer, its connections to Russian anarchist life in the United States. The article begins by analysing the image on the front, explaining how illustrations like the one in question by Fortunino Matania were turned into widely disseminated postcards that spread revolutionary messages well beyond Russian borders. Turning to the information on the back, the article next explores the history of the Anarchist Red Cross in the US and the role that it played in keeping anarchism alive for recent immigrants from Russia. Then the links between the sender’s handwritten message and an area of Chicago that features prominently in histories of immigrant life, the settlement movement and the US labour movement — Halsted Street — are considered. Finally, the connections between the recipient’s family and a 1915 bank robbery in California serve as a window into the history of Russian anarchist circles on the American West Coast.
9
Тинус, Н. Н. "On the affinity of anthropology and anarchism." Вестник МИРБИС, no. 4(28) (December 20, 2021): 205–15. http://dx.doi.org/10.25634/mirbis.2021.4.24.
Full textAbstract:
Статья посвящена взаимосвязи базовых установок анархизма и антропологии, которые анализируются сквозь призму проблемы политического воображения. В первую очередь в статье рассматриваются основные вехи становления .анархистской антропологии. (П. Кластр, Дж. Скотт, Д. Гребер и др.) — направления в антропологической науке, которое задействует свои политические предпосылки. Демонстрируется ее генетическая связь с идеями русских анархистов и идеологией народничества. Утверждается, что антропология снабжает политическую теорию эмпирическими примерами социальной жизни вне государства, и таким образом, улучшает радикальную мысль, сообщая ей позитивное содержание. В Приложении помещена статья Пьера Кластра .Вопрос о власти в первобытных обществах. в переводе автора настоящей статьи. The article is devoted to the relationship between anarchism and anthropology. This relationship is analyzed based on the problem of social imagination. The article examines the development of "anarchist anthropology" (P. Clastre, J. Scott, D. Greber etc.). Its genetic connection with the ideas of Russian anarchists and the ideology of narodniks is demonstrated. It is argued that anthropology provides political theory with empirical examples of social life outside the state, improves radical thought by imparting positive content to it. The Appendix contains an article by Pierre Clastres "The Question of Power in Primitive Societies" translated by the author of this article.
10
Confino, Michael. "1903-1914." Russian History 37, no. 3 (2010): 179–207. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/187633110x510419.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractFrom the first years after 1900, the Russian anarchists debated the “question of the organization,” and examined how they should organize the movement so that they may carry on its political activities and secure freedom of expression and of spontaneous action both for its members and for the masses. Opposed as they were to all kind of hierarchic, centralized, and pyramidal types of organization, most of the Russian anarchists preferred the creation of independent and autonomous groups whose members would be linked by a community of ideas and feelings. (The first groups appeared in Russia in 1903.) Under the influence of classical anarchist thinkers like Bakunin, Kropotkin, and Malatesta, some of them saw in anarchism not only an ideology, but a way of life, and tried to create cells in the image of the future society. Everyday realities compelled many of them to adopt more efficient and practical solutions. The most frequent terms used in their vocabulary (and examined here) reveal their state of mind and ways of action, terms such as self-rule, initiative, autonomous action, independence, creativity, and free activity. Their groups were usually homogenous in terms of their social, educational, and national or ethnic composition. They rejected the practice of collecting members' fees or donations. As a result they faced the problem of how to finance their activities. A major debate ensued whether or not to use “expropriations” (eksy), armed attacks on state institutions or private enterprises, for gathering funds, and how such actions were viewed by the masses. The Revolution of 1905, in which the anarchists participated actively, had important repercussions on their views and ways of organizing.
Dissertations / Theses on the topic "Russian Anarchism"
1
Gamblin, Graham John. "Russian populism and its relations with anarchism 1870-1881." Thesis, University of Birmingham, 2000. http://etheses.bham.ac.uk//id/eprint/1401/.
Full textAbstract:
In both Soviet and Western historiography, Russian populism (narodnichestvo) has been studied more or less in isolation from the broader socialist movement in Europe. The aim of this thesis is to show that although it undoubtedly possessed characteristics peculiar to Russia, the populist movement should be understood as part of the Europe-wide revolutionary movement. To accomplish this, the thesis is structured around chapters discussing individuals who were involved in both the Russian revolutionary movement and the European anarchist movement, with which populism shared many ideas, ideologies tactics and internal disputes. These individuals are Mikhail Bakunin, Zemfirii Ralli and Petr Kropotkin. Around these chapters are studies of groups or movements connected with those individuals in Russia or Europe. Central themes include consistency, or the social groups which the revolutionaries hoped to address; organisational forms adopted by anarchists and populists; tactics to be used to rouse their constituencies to action and to organise and achieve revolution; relations of the revolutionaries to the masses; the differing concepts of political and social/economic revolution; and the rise of terrorism in both movements.
2
Duncan, Peter John Stuart. "Russian messianism : a historical and political analysis." Thesis, University of Glasgow, 1989. http://theses.gla.ac.uk/6873/.
Full textAbstract:
This is an analysis of the nature and political significance of Russian messianism: the idea that the Russian people or the Russian State is the `chosen people' or the `chosen instrument'. I outline the genesis of the theory of Moscow, the Third Rome and discuss the ideas and activities of the nineteenth-century Slavophils, the pan-Slavists, Dostoevsky and Vladimir Solovyov. I examine the influence of messianism on Russian Communism, considering Berdiaev's views. The main part of the work investigates the rebirth of interest in Russian messianism in the Brezhnev period. I try to investigate the links between this cultural movement and the Russian nationalist elements within the political éite. My main sources for this are samizdat journals and articles, in particular the journal Veche, cultural journals such as Novyi mir, Molodaia gvardiia and Nash sovremennik, Party documents and éigré/ journals. I find that Russian messianism has been especially important at times when the country is in crisis: Russia is in Golgotha, but where there is suffering there is also redemption, not only for Russia but for humanity. It has by no means been always dominant in intellectual thought. It has had little influence (under either tsars or Communists) on the fields of nationality policy, policy towards religion or foreign policy. Today, as in the nineteenth century, its adherents can be opponents or supporters of the existing State structure. The growth of non-Russian nationalism under Gorbachov, combined with glasnost', has fuelled Russian nationalism. This is unlikely to be co-opted into the official ideology, because it would increase the dissatisfaction of the non-Russians.
3
McGeever, Brendan Francis. "The Bolshevik confrontation with antisemitism in the Russian Revolution, 1917-1919." Thesis, University of Glasgow, 2015. http://theses.gla.ac.uk/6806/.
Full textAbstract:
The Russian Revolution of 1917 was the high point of class struggle in the twentieth-century. For the first time in world history, a social movement predicated on the overcoming of class exploitation succeeded in gaining state power. In the days and weeks following October 1917 insurrection, a self-declared Marxist government set about the task of constructing a socialist society. However the Russian Revolution was more than the mass political mobilisation of class resentments. In addition to proletarians and peasants, the Bolsheviks also mobilised national minorities, for whom October represented the opportunity to put an end to centuries of national oppression. The Bolshevik promise, therefore, entailed not just class solidarity, but national self-determination and internationalism as well. In the very moment of revolution, however, these sentiments were put to the test as mass outbreaks of antisemitic pogroms spread across the vast regions of the former Pale of Settlement. The pogroms posed fundamental questions for the Bolshevik project, since they revealed the nature and extent of working class and peasant attachments to antisemitic and racialised forms of consciousness. This dissertation has two broad aims: first, it sets out to offer the most comprehensive analysis to date of the explosive articulation between antisemitism and the revolutionary process. It reveals, for example, the extent to which class struggle and anti-bourgeois discourse could overlap with antisemitic representations of Jewishness, often with devastating consequences. Second, it offers the most comprehensive analysis to date of the Soviet government attempt to arrest this articulation between antisemitism and revolutionary politics. Contrary to existing understandings, the dissertation argues that the ‘Bolshevik’ campaign against antisemitism was led not the Party leadership, as is often assumed, but by a small grouping of non-Bolshevik Jewish socialists who worked in the Party and Soviet government throughout 1918 and 1919. Having brought into focus an almost entirely overlooked moment in the history of Jewish experiences of, and responses to, antisemitism, the dissertation concludes by reflecting on how this reframing of the Russian Revolution might offer insights for anti-racists and socialists engaged in struggles for social justice today.
4
Meadowcroft, Jeff R. "The history and historiography of the Russian worker-revolutionaries of the 1870s." Thesis, University of Glasgow, 2011. http://theses.gla.ac.uk/3079/.
Full textAbstract:
In March, 1877, the radical worker Pëtr Alekseev gave his speech at the ‘Trial of Fifty,’ contributing to the social-revolutionary movement one of the founding documents in Russia’s fledgling, working-class history. In the decades that followed, many others of the workers’ circles of the 1870s would compose and contribute their own stories to this revolutionary, ‘workers’ history.’ It was understood that, for workers to ‘speak for themselves’ was one step towards a workers’ revolution, carried out by and for the working people. The ‘workers’ voice’ had been borne by Alekseev in 1877, and was shared by worker-memoirists and other worker-writers through the early twentieth century. Individual workers were called represent, embody, testify to and speak for the mass, or the working-class as a whole. Thus, the notion of the ‘workers’ voice’ tied together the propaganda, the historiography, and the philosophy of the Russian social-revolutionary movement. A study of the ‘workers’ voice’ in history and historiography reveals the connections between these areas of revolutionary thought and practice, and provides a better understanding of the role of individual workers - as activists and as writers - in the Russian socialist movement. Revolutionary historiography developed alongside and in concert with political theories of the social revolution, mass action, social law and social determination, individuality, and consciousness. For a small number of radical democrats-turned-‘rebels,’ anarchists, and social-revolutionaries – most, if not all, born into the educated elite, a few to the families of the high, landed nobility - adherence to the narodnik tenet that ‘the emancipation of the working class should be conquered by workers’ themselves’ made their own, committed or conscious choice of the ‘cause’ over the existing system of things marginal to the historical and social forces driving Russia towards revolution. The ‘going to the people’ movement was aimed at bringing ‘workers themselves’ into their movement. By developing certain working people into carriers of the socialist message, the movement hitherto limited to students, publicists, and the wayward sons and daughters of state officials, merchants and clergymen would become the ‘a working-class matter.’ Thus, a special place was allotted to the ‘self-educated’ or ‘self-developed’ workers who, like the self-styled ‘intelligentsia,’ were consciously committed, synthesising ‘consciousness’ with their own class experience and the social necessity behind it. The political and historical valorisation of the ‘workers’ voice’ extended this idea into the documentation and the history of the popular and workers’ movements. Just as the workers would have to ‘emancipate themselves,’ so too would they speak for themselves and write their own history. This history, it was thought, would eventually belong to the workers by right. Thus, historical writing and the documentation of a workers’ history, informed by judgments regarding individuality, society, class, history, and their relationships, became politically significant for the revolutionary movement as working people began to enter it and ‘speak for themselves.’ Late in the nineteenth century, the worker-revolutionaries of the 1870s began to write their own memoirs of events. Entering the documentary record as individuals, it was their task to testify to working-class experience. Thus, at the point where working people became ‘individuals’ for history and for future historians, marking themselves as different from the mass by leaving their own writings, and stories, and memoirs, they were also tied inextricably to a political viewpoint that identified every and any worker as practically identical. As political figures, ‘conscious’ radicals who had taken responsibility for their own actions, their lives were historically definite; as ‘working men,’ sharing in a victimhood that was common to millions, their lives were indefinite, unhistorical, alienated. In the attempt to explain one part of their lives by the other, in the juxtaposition of class experience with political experience, in the light of a political function that had workers become witnesses rather than writers, the worker-revolutionaries reproduced in their political and historical writings the class categories that their radicalism had contradicted. The awkward position of worker-intelligent – in one half unique, conscious, definite, historical, active, by the other: plural, instinctive, indefinite, and passive – was stamped into ‘workers’ writings.
5
Gomes, Leandro Ribeiro [UNESP]. "Libertários e Bolcheviques: a repercussão da Revolução Russa na imprensa operária anarquista brasileira (1917-1922)." Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP), 2012. http://hdl.handle.net/11449/94089.
Full textAbstract:
Made available in DSpace on 2014-06-11T19:26:53Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 0
Previous issue date: 2012-08-08Bitstream added on 2014-06-13T18:30:49Z : No. of bitstreams: 1
gomes_lr_me_assis.pdf: 3441269 bytes, checksum: dc59136f080d769ecdc817cba58d1648 (MD5)Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)
No começo do século XX, a Revolução Russa abalou o mundo com as dimensões de suas experiências e a radicalidade de suas propostas. Por pressão das camadas populares russas insatisfeitas com as mazelas da primeira guerra mundial, o czarismo foi derrubado e em seguida o governo provisório, desencadeando uma revolução de forte caráter operário e camponês. Os sovietes (conselhos populares) espalharam-se por todo o território de um país de dimensões continentais (constituindo-se de início, uma grande experiência libertária). Com isso, a Rússia Soviética tornou-se uma referência para todos os movimentos revolucionários e socialistas ao redor do mundo, e o movimento operário brasileiro (que na época era predominantemente de tendência anarquista) não ficou imune aos impactos desse evento. Este trabalho é o resultado de uma pesquisa que analisa o entendimento e a compreensão que os militantes anarquistas brasileiros tiveram a respeito da revolução na Rússia, por meio de sua imprensa. Para tanto, utilizamos como fontes documentais os jornais A Plebe, A Vanguarda, A Obra, O Libertario, A Semana Social, A Luta, Cronica Subversiva, O Debate, O Cosmopolita, Spártacus, Voz do Povo e o Boletim da Aliança Anarquista do Rio de Janeiro. As formas como os anarquistas enxergaram e representaram este acontecimento em seus periódicos, nos revelam, e nos possibilitam investigar e compreender, os conflitos e mudanças internas no movimento operário brasileiro do período. Movimento operário este que ficou dividido entre “libertários e bolcheviques”, devido o caráter autoritário do regime russo, que não contemplava as expectativas do anarquismo, apesar dos elementos libertários da experiência revolucionária ocorrida na Rússia
In the early twentieth century the Russian Revolution shook the world with the dimensions of its experiences and the radicalism of its proposals. Under pressure from Russian grassroots popular classes dissatisfied with the ills of the First World War, the Tsarist regime and then the interim government were overthrown, sparking a revolution of strong proletarian and peasantry character. The Soviets (popular councils) have spread throughout the territory of a country of continental dimensions (constituting at the beginning, a great libertarian experience). Thus, Soviet Russia became a reference for all socialist and revolutionary movements around the world, and the Brazilian labor movement (which at that time was predominantly anarchist) was not immune to the impacts of this event. This work is part of a study that analyzes the understanding and the perception that the Brazilian anarchist militants had about the revolution in Russia, by the reading of their press. We used as documentary sources the following anarchist press: A Plebe, A Vanguarda, A Obra, O Libertario, A Semana Social, A Luta, Cronica Subversiva, O Debate, O Cosmopolita, Spártacus, Voz do Povo and the Boletim da Aliança Anarquista do Rio de Janeiro. The ways in which anarchists saw and represented this event in their journals reveal and enables us to investigate and understand the conflicts and changes within the Brazilian labor movement of the period which was split between libertarians and Bolsheviks, because the authoritarian character of the Russian regime which did not include the expectations of anarchism, despite its revolutionary elements
6
SOUZA, Rafael Benedito de. "A Revolu??o Russa nos jornais anarquistas do Rio de Janeiro (1917-1922)." Universidade Federal Rural do Rio de Janeiro, 2016. https://tede.ufrrj.br/jspui/handle/jspui/1866.
Full textAbstract:
Submitted by Jorge Silva (jorgelmsilva@ufrrj.br) on 2017-07-11T18:12:21Z
No. of bitstreams: 1
2016 - Rafael Benedito de Souza.pdf: 1641981 bytes, checksum: 6595204190137fe7dd5a9c82e52fff7b (MD5)Made available in DSpace on 2017-07-11T18:12:21Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 2016 - Rafael Benedito de Souza.pdf: 1641981 bytes, checksum: 6595204190137fe7dd5a9c82e52fff7b (MD5) Previous issue date: 2016-05-09
The Russian Revolution of October 1917 it was a revolution which meant socialism to Russia and was closely watched by several political groups of the left and labor movements around the world. In Brazil, the anarchists accompanied by his press this political event. In its pages there were several discussions on the character of this revolution. This work seeks to analyze the speeches made on the Russian Revolution in anarchist newspapers of Rio de Janeiro in order to understand the reasons given by the anarchists to declare support or not the Revolution.
A Revolu??o Russa de Outubro de 1917 foi uma revolu??o que pretendeu levar o socialismo para a R?ssia e foi observada atentamente por diversos grupos pol?ticos de esquerda e movimentos de trabalhadores em todo o mundo. No Brasil, os anarquistas acompanharam atrav?s de sua imprensa este acontecimento pol?tico. Em suas p?ginas ocorreram diversas discuss?es sob o car?ter desta revolu??o. Este trabalho analisa os discursos produzidos sobre a Revolu??o Russa nos jornais anarquistas do Rio de Janeiro com o objetivo de entender os motivos apresentados pelos anarquistas para declarar apoio ou n?o a Revolu??o.
7
Gomes, Leandro Ribeiro. "Libertários e Bolcheviques : a repercussão da Revolução Russa na imprensa operária anarquista brasileira (1917-1922) /." Assis : [s.n.], 2012. http://hdl.handle.net/11449/94089.
Full textAbstract:
Orientador: Claudinei Magno Magre MendesBanca: Sérgio Augusto Queiroz Norte
Banca: Cesar Augusto de Carvalho
Resumo: No começo do século XX, a Revolução Russa abalou o mundo com as dimensões de suas experiências e a radicalidade de suas propostas. Por pressão das camadas populares russas insatisfeitas com as mazelas da primeira guerra mundial, o czarismo foi derrubado e em seguida o governo provisório, desencadeando uma revolução de forte caráter operário e camponês. Os sovietes (conselhos populares) espalharam-se por todo o território de um país de dimensões continentais (constituindo-se de início, uma grande experiência libertária). Com isso, a Rússia Soviética tornou-se uma referência para todos os movimentos revolucionários e socialistas ao redor do mundo, e o movimento operário brasileiro (que na época era predominantemente de tendência anarquista) não ficou imune aos impactos desse evento. Este trabalho é o resultado de uma pesquisa que analisa o entendimento e a compreensão que os militantes anarquistas brasileiros tiveram a respeito da revolução na Rússia, por meio de sua imprensa. Para tanto, utilizamos como fontes documentais os jornais A Plebe, A Vanguarda, A Obra, O Libertario, A Semana Social, A Luta, Cronica Subversiva, O Debate, O Cosmopolita, Spártacus, Voz do Povo e o Boletim da Aliança Anarquista do Rio de Janeiro. As formas como os anarquistas enxergaram e representaram este acontecimento em seus periódicos, nos revelam, e nos possibilitam investigar e compreender, os conflitos e mudanças internas no movimento operário brasileiro do período. Movimento operário este que ficou dividido entre "libertários e bolcheviques", devido o caráter autoritário do regime russo, que não contemplava as expectativas do anarquismo, apesar dos elementos libertários da experiência revolucionária ocorrida na Rússia
Abstract: In the early twentieth century the Russian Revolution shook the world with the dimensions of its experiences and the radicalism of its proposals. Under pressure from Russian grassroots popular classes dissatisfied with the ills of the First World War, the Tsarist regime and then the interim government were overthrown, sparking a revolution of strong proletarian and peasantry character. The Soviets (popular councils) have spread throughout the territory of a country of continental dimensions (constituting at the beginning, a great libertarian experience). Thus, Soviet Russia became a reference for all socialist and revolutionary movements around the world, and the Brazilian labor movement (which at that time was predominantly anarchist) was not immune to the impacts of this event. This work is part of a study that analyzes the understanding and the perception that the Brazilian anarchist militants had about the revolution in Russia, by the reading of their press. We used as documentary sources the following anarchist press: A Plebe, A Vanguarda, A Obra, O Libertario, A Semana Social, A Luta, Cronica Subversiva, O Debate, O Cosmopolita, Spártacus, Voz do Povo and the Boletim da Aliança Anarquista do Rio de Janeiro. The ways in which anarchists saw and represented this event in their journals reveal and enables us to investigate and understand the conflicts and changes within the Brazilian labor movement of the period which was split between "libertarians and Bolsheviks," because the authoritarian character of the Russian regime which did not include the expectations of anarchism, despite its revolutionary elements
Mestre
8
Berry, David G. "The response of the French anarchist movement to the Russian Revolution (1917-24) to the Spanish Revolution and civil war (1936-39)." Thesis, University of Sussex, 1988. http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.305033.
Full text
9
Merridale, Catherine Anne. "The Communist Party in Moscow 1925-1932." Thesis, University of Birmingham, 1987. http://etheses.bham.ac.uk//id/eprint/1409/.
Full textAbstract:
The thesis examines the Communist Party in Moscow between 1925 and 1932. Its structure, role and membership are studied, together with its relationship with the population of Moscow. A study is also made of politics in the period, with special reference to the oppositions of the 1920's. Four broad problems are discussed. The first is the relationship between the central Party leadership and the Moscow Committee. Second is the role of the grassroots activist in political life. Thirdly, the failure of the oppositions is studied in detail. Finally, popular influence over the Party is examined with a view to discussing how far the revolution had been 'betrayed' in this period. It is found that the Moscow Committee was less autonomous than other regional organs, but that grassroots initiative played an important part in political life. In general, people were reluctant to engage in formal opposition. This largely explains the defeat of the Left and Right oppositions, who failed to attract significant support. The majority of Muscovites remained apathetic or hostile to the Party, but a core of committed activists within it was responsible for many of the period's achievements. To the extent that they supported and even initiated policy, Stalin's 'great turn' included an element of 'revolution from below'.
10
Coombs, Nicholas W. "Lev Kamenev : a case study in 'Bolshevik Centrism'." Thesis, University of Birmingham, 2017. http://etheses.bham.ac.uk//id/eprint/7154/.
Full textAbstract:
This dissertation challenges the view that Lev Kamenev lacked a clear socialist vision and had no discernible objectives. It contends that Kamenev had an ideological line and political goals shaped by Ferdinand Lassalle. Kamenev adopted Lassalle’s desire for a democratic socialist republic and his method to achieve end aims. Through dialogical discourse Kamenev aimed to gain allies by overcoming differences by focusing on points of agreement. This was his ‘Bolshevik Centrism’. Ideologically, Kamenev absorbed Lassalle’s concept of the ‘Fourth Estate’, which mandated proletarian culture first predominate in society before revolution could occur. This helps explain his opposition to revolution in 1905 and 1917, and sheds light on his assessment in the early 1920s that the Bolsheviks had not founded the ‘dictatorship of the proletariat’, but the ‘dictatorship of the party’. In trying to overcome this reality he adapted Lassalle’s vision for an all-encompassing selfless state and endeavoured to merge the party, the state, and the masses into one. His aspiration to win over peasants and workers placed him in a centrist position, whereby he used his authority to challenge Trotsky and Bukharin’s leftist and rightist policies. However, under the one-party dictatorship his actions directly contributed to the rise of Stalin.
Books on the topic "Russian Anarchism"
1
Gamblin, Graham John. Russian populism and its relations with anarchism 1870-1881. Birmingham: University of Birmingham, 1999.
Find full text
2
Burbidge, Andrea. Anarchism and the Russian Revolution: An investigation of the anarchist movement in the Russian Revolution, 1917-1921, and its portrayal in western history. Ottawa: National Library of Canada = Bibliothèque nationale du Canada, 1992.
Find full text
3
A, Kropotkin. The State--its historic role: A new translation from the French original. London: Freedom Press, 1987.
Find full text
4
A, Kropotkin. L'Etat: Son role historique. San Bernardino, CA: Yves Montregard, 2014.
Find full text
7
Petrov, Sergeĭ. Bakunin: Pervyĭ pank Evropy : Roman--versii︠a︡. Moskva: Pi︠a︡tyĭ Rim, 2018.
Find full text
8
Gamblin, Graham. Terrorism in Russian populism and European anarchism in the 1870s: A comparative analysis. Birmingham: University of Birmingham, Centre for Russian and East European Studies, 1998.
Find full text
9
Burenina, Olʹga. Anarkhizm i iskusstvo avangarda. Sankt-Peterburg: Petropolis, 2021.
Find full text
10
Goodwin, James. Confronting Dostoevsky's demons: Anarchism and the specter of Bakunin in twentieth-century Russia. New York: Peter Lang, 2010.
Find full textBook chapters on the topic "Russian Anarchism"
1
D’Agostino, Anthony. "Anarchism and Marxism in the Russian Revolution." In The Palgrave Handbook of Anarchism, 409–28. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2018. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-75620-2_24.
Full text
2
von Beyme, Klaus. "Sozialismus, Anarchismus, Kommunismus." In Politische Theorien in Russland, 101–208. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, 2001. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-663-11102-3_4.
Full text
3
Rodriguez, Arturo Zoffmann. "The experience of defeat." In The Spanish Anarchists and the Russian Revolution, 1917–24, 168–224. London: Routledge, 2023. http://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9781003412465-5.
Full text
4
Rodriguez, Arturo Zoffmann. "The three Bolshevik years." In The Spanish Anarchists and the Russian Revolution, 1917–24, 6–42. London: Routledge, 2023. http://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9781003412465-2.
Full text
5
Rodriguez, Arturo Zoffmann. "Three missions." In The Spanish Anarchists and the Russian Revolution, 1917–24, 103–67. London: Routledge, 2023. http://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9781003412465-4.
Full text
6
Rodriguez, Arturo Zoffmann. "Introduction." In The Spanish Anarchists and the Russian Revolution, 1917–24, 1–5. London: Routledge, 2023. http://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9781003412465-1.
Full text
7
Rodriguez, Arturo Zoffmann. "Conclusion." In The Spanish Anarchists and the Russian Revolution, 1917–24, 225–28. London: Routledge, 2023. http://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9781003412465-6.
Full text
8
Rodriguez, Arturo Zoffmann. "Negotiating Bolshevism, 1917–19." In The Spanish Anarchists and the Russian Revolution, 1917–24, 43–102. London: Routledge, 2023. http://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9781003412465-3.
Full text
9
Hughes, Michael. "6. Returning to the Revolutionary Fray." In Feliks Volkhovskii, 191–230. Cambridge, UK: Open Book Publishers, 2024. http://dx.doi.org/10.11647/obp.0385.06.
Full textAbstract:
This chapter examines Volkhovskii’s career during the first five years of the twentieth century. Volkhovskii had to spend a good deal of time during these years fighting to keep Free Russia in business, given that sales had for many years been low, while periodic outbursts of anarchist violence across Europe threatened to tar the reputation of all revolutionaries. Volkhovskii nevertheless devoted an increasing amount of time to supporting the development of the revolutionary movement itself. He was one of the founder members of Agrarian-Socialist League, formed following the death of Petr Lavrov in 1900, which in turn merged with the Socialist-Revolutionary Party in 1902. During the first few years of the twentieth century, he contributed extensively to revolutionary publications including Narodnoe delo, as well as writing a number of fables that were designed to articulate radical ideas in a form that could easily be understood by a peasant audience. Volkhovskii worked closely with the Finnish nationalist Konni Zilliacus to bring together socialist groups in Russia with nationalist groups from areas like Finland to form a united opposition to tsarism. He also worked with Zilliacus to procure weapons for revolutionary groups to support uprisings at a time when the attention of the government was focused on the war with Japan. Volkhovskii was also active in the Socialist Revolutionary Party, following its merger with the Agrarian-Socialist League, regularly visiting Switzerland to take part in its efforts to support revolutionary groups in Russia. Volkhovskii was from the start of the century increasingly optimistic about the prospects for revolution in Russia. He was living in Switzerland for most of 1905, when disorder erupted across Russia, and while ill-health prevented his return to Russia, he was convinced that the revolutionary events of that year showed that the tsarist government was close to collapse.
10
Aizman, Ania. "In the Jewish Tower." In With Freedom in Our Ears, 194–216. University of Illinois Press, 2023. http://dx.doi.org/10.5622/illinois/9780252045011.003.0010.
Full textAbstract:
Writing in the 1920s for a Soviet Russian audience, Semyon Sibiriakov (1888-1937) painted one of the few extant portraits of Jewish anarchist culture told from within the movement: particularly, of post-1905 Jewish anarchism and anarchists in tsarist prisons. His stories show a distinctive aspect of Jewish anarchism: that collective resistance was a continuum ranging from terror to civil disobedience, and from jokes and pranks to historical commemoration and personal eulogy. This chapter discusses Sibiriakov in the context of organizations that harbored anarchists and anarchist writing in the early Soviet period and contrasts his career with that of more famous counterparts, such as Isaac Babel.
Conference papers on the topic "Russian Anarchism"
1
Evlampiev, I. "J. G. FICHTE�S PHILOSOPHY AND TRADITION OF RUSSIAN CLASSICAL ANARCHISM." In 5th SGEM International Multidisciplinary Scientific Conferences on SOCIAL SCIENCES and ARTS SGEM2018. STEF92 Technology, 2018. http://dx.doi.org/10.5593/sgemsocial2018/2.2/s09.068.
Full text