Estates and classes.
The entire urban and rural population was divided “according to the difference in rights of state” into four main categories: nobility, clergy, urban and rural inhabitants.
The nobility remained the privileged class. It shared into personal and hereditary.
Right to personal nobility, which was not inherited, received by representatives of various classes who were in the civil service and had the lowest rank in the Table of Ranks. By serving the Fatherland, one could receive hereditary, i.e., inherited, nobility. To do this, one had to receive a certain rank or award. The emperor could grant hereditary nobility for successful entrepreneurial or other activities.
City dwellers- hereditary honorary citizens, merchants, townspeople, artisans.
Rural inhabitants, Cossacks and other people engaged in agriculture.
The country was in the process of forming a bourgeois society with its two the main classes - the bourgeoisie and the proletariat. At the same time, the predominance of semi-feudal agriculture in the Russian economy contributed to the preservation and two main classes of feudal society - landowners and peasants.
The growth of cities, the development of industry, transport and communications, and the increase in the cultural needs of the population lead to the second half of the 19th century. to increase the proportion of people professionally engaged in mental work and artistic creativity - intelligentsia: engineers, teachers, doctors, lawyers, journalists, etc.
Peasantry.
The peasants are still constituted the vast majority population of the Russian Empire. Peasants, both former serfs and state-owned ones, were part of self-governing rural societies - communities Several rural societies made up the volost.
Community members were connected mutual guarantee in paying taxes and fulfilling duties. Therefore, there was a dependence of the peasants on the community, manifested primarily in the restriction of freedom of movement.
For the peasants there was special volost court, whose members were also elected by the village assembly. At the same time, the volost courts made their decisions not only on the basis of legal norms, but also guided by customs. Often these courts punished peasants for such offenses as wasting money, drunkenness, and even witchcraft. In addition, peasants were subject to certain punishments that had long been abolished for other classes. For example, volost courts had the right to sentence members of their class who had not reached 60 years of age to flogging.
Russian peasants revered their elders, viewing them as bearers of experience and traditions. This attitude extended to the emperor and served as a source of monarchism, faith in the “tsar-father” - an intercessor, guardian of truth and justice.
Russian peasants professed Orthodoxy. Unusually harsh natural conditions and the associated hard work - suffering, the results of which did not always correspond to the efforts expended, the bitter experience of lean years immersed the peasants in the world of superstitions, signs and rituals.
Liberation from serfdom brought to the village big changes:
- P First of all, the stratification of the peasants intensified. The horseless peasant (if he was not engaged in other non-agricultural work) became a symbol of rural poverty. At the end of the 80s. in European Russia, 27% of households were horseless. Having one horse was considered a sign of poverty. There were about 29% of such farms. At the same time, from 5 to 25% of owners had up to ten horses. They bought large land holdings, hired farm laborers and expanded their farms.
- a sharp increase in the need for money. The peasants had to pay redemption payments and a poll tax, have funds for zemstvo and secular fees, for rent payments for land and for repaying bank loans. The majority of peasant farms were involved in market relations. The main source of peasant income was the sale of bread. But due to low yields, peasants were often forced to sell grain to the detriment of their own interests. The export of grain abroad was based on the malnutrition of the village residents and was rightly called by contemporaries “hungry export.”
- Poverty, hardships associated with redemption payments, lack of land and other troubles firmly tied the bulk of the peasants to the community. After all, it guaranteed its members mutual support. In addition, the distribution of land in the community helped the middle and poorest peasants to survive in case of famine. Allotments were distributed among community members interstriped, and were not brought together in one place. Each community member had a small plot (strip) in different places. In a dry year, a plot located in a lowland could produce a quite bearable harvest; in rainy years, a plot on a hillock helped out.
There were peasants committed to the traditions of their fathers and grandfathers, to the community with its collectivism and security, and there were also “new” peasants who wanted to farm independently at their own risk. Many peasants went to work in the cities. The long-term isolation of men from the family, from village life and rural work led to an increased role of women not only in economic life, but also in peasant self-government.
The most important problem of Russia on the eve of the 20th century. was to turn the peasants - the bulk of the country's population - into politically mature citizens, respecting both their own and others' rights and capable of active participation in public life.
Nobility.
After the peasant reforms In 1861, the stratification of the nobility was rapidly progressing due to the active influx of people from other segments of the population into the privileged class.
Gradually, the most privileged class lost its economic advantages. After the peasant reform of 1861, the area of land owned by the nobles decreased by an average of 0.68 million acres 8* per year. The number of landowners among the nobles was declining. Moreover, almost half of the landowners had estates that were considered small. In the post-reform period, most of the landowners continued to use semi-feudal forms of farming and went bankrupt.
Simultaneously Some of the nobles widely participated in entrepreneurial activities: in railway construction, industry, banking and insurance. Funds for business were received from the redemption under the reform of 1861, from the leasing of land and on collateral. Some nobles became owners of large industrial enterprises, took prominent positions in companies, and became owners of shares and real estate. A significant part of the nobles joined the ranks of owners of small commercial and industrial establishments. Many acquired the profession of doctors, lawyers, and became writers, artists, and performers. At the same time, some of the nobles went bankrupt, joining the lower strata of society.
Thus, the decline of the landowner economy accelerated the stratification of the nobility and weakened the influence of the landowners in the state. In the second half of the 19th century. the nobles lost their dominant position in the life of Russian society: political power was concentrated in the hands of officials, economic power in the hands of the bourgeoisie, the intelligentsia became the ruler of thoughts, and the class of once all-powerful landowners gradually disappeared.
Bourgeoisie.
The development of capitalism in Russia led to the growth of the bourgeoisie. Continuing to be officially listed as nobles, merchants, bourgeois, and peasants, representatives of this class played an increasingly important role in the life of the country. Since the time of the “railway fever” of the 60s and 70s. The bourgeoisie was actively replenished at the expense of officials. By serving on the boards of private banks and industrial enterprises, officials provided a link between state power and private production. They helped industrialists obtain lucrative orders and concessions.
The period of the formation of the Russian bourgeoisie coincided with the active activity of the populists within the country and with the growth of the revolutionary struggle of the Western European proletariat. Therefore, the bourgeoisie in Russia looked at the autocratic government as its protector from revolutionary uprisings.
And although the interests of the bourgeoisie were often infringed by the state, they did not dare to take active action against the autocracy.
Some of the founders of famous commercial and industrial families - S.V. Morozov, P.K. Konovalov - remained illiterate until the end of their days. But they tried to give their children a good education, including a university education. Sons were often sent abroad to study commercial and industrial practice.
Many representatives of this new generation of the bourgeoisie sought to support scientists and representatives of the creative intelligentsia, and invested money in the creation of libraries and art galleries. A. A. Korzinkin, K. T. Soldatenkov, P. K. Botkin and D. P. Botkin, S. M. Tretyakov and P. M. Tretyakov, S. I. played a significant role in the expansion of charity and patronage of the arts. Mamontov.
Proletariat.
One more The main class of industrial society was the proletariat. The proletariat included all hired workers, including those employed in agriculture and crafts, but its core were factory, mining and railway workers - the industrial proletariat. His education took place simultaneously with the industrial revolution. By the mid-90s. XIX century About 10 million people were employed in the wage labor sector, of which 1.5 million were industrial workers.
The working class of Russia had a number of features:
- He was closely connected with the peasantry. A significant part of the factories and factories were located in villages, and the industrial proletariat itself was constantly replenished with people from the village. A hired factory worker was, as a rule, a first-generation proletarian and maintained a close connection with the village.
- Representatives became workers different nationalities.
- In Russia there was a significantly greater concentration proletariat in large enterprises than in other countries.
Life of workers.
In factory barracks (dormitories), they settled not according to the workshops, but according to the provinces and districts from which they came. The workers from one locality were headed by a master, who recruited them to the enterprise. Workers had difficulty getting used to urban conditions. Separation from home often led to a drop in moral level and drunkenness. The workers worked long hours and, in order to send money home, huddled in damp and dark rooms and ate poorly.
Workers' speeches for improving their situation in the 80-90s. became more numerous, sometimes they took on acute forms, accompanied by violence against factory management, destruction of factory premises and clashes with the police and even with troops. The largest strike was that broke out on January 7, 1885 at Morozov’s Nikolskaya manufactory in the city of Orekhovo-Zuevo.
The labor movement during this period was a response to the specific actions of “their” factory owners: increasing fines, lowering prices, forced payment of wages in goods from the factory store, etc.
Clergy.
Church ministers - the clergy - constituted a special class, divided into black and white clergy. The black clergy - monks - took on special obligations, including leaving the "world". The monks lived in numerous monasteries.
The white clergy lived in the “world”; their main task was to perform worship and religious preaching. From the end of the 17th century. a procedure was established according to which the place of a deceased priest was inherited, as a rule, by his son or another relative. This contributed to the transformation of the white clergy into a closed class.
Although the clergy in Russia belonged to a privileged part of society, rural priests, who made up the vast majority of it, eked out a miserable existence, as they fed on their own labor and at the expense of parishioners, who themselves often barely made ends meet. In addition, as a rule, they were burdened with large families.
The Orthodox Church had its own educational institutions. At the end of the 19th century. in Russia there were 4 theological academies, in which about a thousand people studied, and 58 seminaries, training up to 19 thousand future clergy.
Intelligentsia.
At the end of the 19th century. Of the more than 125 million inhabitants of Russia, 870 thousand could be classified as intelligentsia. The country had over 3 thousand scientists and writers, 4 thousand engineers and technicians, 79.5 thousand teachers and 68 thousand private teachers, 18.8 thousand doctors, 18 thousand artists, musicians and actors.
In the first half of the 19th century. The ranks of the intelligentsia were replenished mainly at the expense of the nobles.
Some of the intelligentsia were never able to find practical application for their knowledge. Neither industry, nor zemstvos, nor other institutions could provide employment for many university graduates whose families experienced financial difficulties. Receiving a higher education was not a guarantee of an increase in living standards, and therefore, social status. This gave rise to a mood of protest.
But besides material reward for their work, the most important need of the intelligentsia is freedom of expression, without which true creativity is unthinkable. Therefore, in the absence of political freedoms in the country, the anti-government sentiments of a significant part of the intelligentsia intensified.
Cossacks.
The emergence of the Cossacks was associated with the need to develop and protect the newly acquired outlying lands. For their service, the Cossacks received land from the government. Therefore, a Cossack is both a warrior and a peasant.
At the end of the 19th century. there were 11 Cossack troops
In villages and villages there were special primary and secondary Cossack schools, where much attention was paid to the military training of students.
In 1869, the nature of land ownership in the Cossack regions was finally determined. Communal ownership of stanitsa lands was consolidated, of which each Cossack received a share of 30 dessiatines. The remaining lands constituted military reserves. It was intended mainly to create new village sites as the Cossack population grew. Forests, pastures, and reservoirs were in public use.
Conclusion:
In the second half of the 19th century. there was a breakdown of class barriers and the formation of new groups of society along economic and class lines. The new entrepreneurial class - the bourgeoisie - includes representatives of the merchant class, successful peasant entrepreneurs, and the nobility. The class of hired workers - the proletariat - is replenished primarily at the expense of peasants, but a tradesman, the son of a village priest, and even a “noble gentleman” were not uncommon in this environment. There is a significant democratization of the intelligentsia, even the clergy is losing its former isolation. And only the Cossacks remain to a greater extent adherents to their former way of life.
The most important phenomenon in the social life of post-reform Russia was the formation and growth of a new class - the proletariat.
Even during the reform of 1861, at least 4 million peasants were deprived of land. Subsequently, the number of horseless households, families deprived of their own equipment and completely abandoned the farm grew steadily.
An artificial agrarian overpopulation was created. Millions of peasants were forced to leave the village in search of work. In part, they were absorbed into capitalized agriculture as farm laborers.
In the 80s of the XIX century. in European Russia there were at least 3.5 million agricultural workers. But in most cases, the labor reserves accumulated as a result of the proletarianization of the countryside were channeled into industry. The proletariat also included a significant part of the workers of the pre-reform period, bankrupt artisans, artisans and people from the urban petty bourgeoisie.
At the end of the 19th century. V.I. Lenin, based on a detailed analysis of a number of sources, came to the conclusion that a total of at least 22 million people should be classified as the proletarian strata of the population of Russia (without Finland), of which the actual hired workers employed in agriculture, factory work , mining, railway transport, construction and forestry, as well as those employed at home, amount to about 10 million people.
The formation of the industrial proletariat in Russia took place in an environment of rapid development of machine industry. In this regard, the concentration of workers in large and major enterprises in Russia was higher than in a number of old capitalist countries in Europe.
By 1890, three-quarters of all workers employed in the manufacturing and mining industries of Russia were concentrated in enterprises with 100 or more workers, and almost half in enterprises with 500 or more workers.
“Note” for receiving goods from the factory store. 90s of the XIX century.
In the mining industry, the largest enterprises (with more than 1,000 workers) accounted for 10% of all industrial enterprises in Russia, but concentrated 46% of the total number of workers.
The completion of the transition from manufacture to factory was thus a decisive milestone in the formation of the proletariat.
The old manufacturing worker, closely associated with small property, was replaced by a hereditary proletarian, for whom the only source of existence was the sale of labor power.
In the metalworking and engineering industries already in the 80s. the absolute majority of workers were proletarians, often still classified as peasants only by class. However, this process was delayed by the preservation of remnants of serfdom.
A characteristic feature of Russia's capitalist development - the rapid growth of factory centers located in rural areas, closer to sources of cheap labor - also made it difficult for even career workers to break ties with the land (primarily in industries such as textiles and processing of agricultural raw materials). But this same phenomenon also had another side: it led to a close rapprochement between the peasant masses and the proletariat.
The formation of the industrial proletariat took place as an all-Russian process.
At the same time, the proletariat of Ukraine was formed from both the Ukrainian and Russian populations; The percentage of Russian workers in the ranks of the proletariat of the Baltic states, Belarus, Transcaucasia, and Central Asia was also significant.
In this way, an objective basis was created and strengthened for the unity of workers of different nationalities and the development among them of the ideas of proletarian solidarity.
The intertwining of economic and political oppression made the situation of the worker in Russia especially difficult. There were no legal restrictions on the working day until the workers, through their struggle, forced tsarism to do so in the 90s.
In the 60-80s, the working day was measured, as a rule, by 12-14 hours of hard work, and in many cases exceeded 14 hours. In the Siberian gold mines and on the plantations of sugar factories, it lasted “from dawn to dusk.”
Women and children worked as much as men. The real earnings of workers were significantly less than nominal.
Entrepreneurs forced people to buy food in a factory store at extortionate prices, exacted high fees for space in cramped and dirty barracks, and levied fines that sometimes reached half of their earnings.
Representatives of the tsarist administration regarded any manifestation of worker protest against unbearable working and living conditions as a “rebellion” and “disorder,” always taking the side of the capitalists.
Due to the lack of labor legislation and an oversupply of labor, the living conditions of the proletariat were extremely difficult. The breeders and factory owners did not care at all about the workers. Next to large factories, barracks were built in which workers were housed; they contained a minimum number of amenities; unsanitary conditions and viral diseases flourished. People were housed in them, at least 30 people per room. In these rooms they ate, slept, and did everything in their free time from work. Often single people were housed in the same barracks with their families. The only amenities and furniture they had were wooden beds. There was always a stench in the room, the air was musty, there was practically no light in them.
Often there were simply no barracks at the factories and people had to sleep at their workplaces in the factory workshops. Workers often got sick; the most common occupational diseases were: eye diseases, lung disease. The sick were not provided with medical treatment, and no severance pay was given for illness. People in any condition were obliged to work.
As a rule, until the 1880s, the hiring of workers in factories was practiced on the basis of a “verbal” or written contract for a term! for a year, most often “from Easter to Easter”. Before the expiration of the established period, the workers’ passports were taken into the office, and they were actually deprived of their freedom, without the right to demand early payment. The arbitrariness of entrepreneurs was not limited by anything. The manufacturer, in turn, could fire the worker at any time. He also had the right to levy fines from workers at his discretion. The workers were not in any way protected from arbitrariness on the part of their superiors. The working day was extremely long, reaching 15 and sometimes up to 16 hours a day. The working week was 6 days long, and sometimes proletarians were forced to work on Sunday.
The work was hard, exhausting, and it got to the point that workers even died at their machines. For offenses they could be subjected to corporal punishment; workers were sometimes beaten simply to force them to work or to wake up those who had fallen asleep at the workplace.
The labor of women and children was widely practiced; they were paid lower than the labor of men, and they had to work almost as much as men. It was profitable for entrepreneurs to hire children and women, this situation suited them and no moral or ethical standards were an obstacle for them.
The state made attempts to improve the situation, but as a rule they did not lead to anything; the position of the proletariat remained the same.
Not only the work of workers was regulated, but also their personal lives: in many enterprises, workers were forced to buy goods from a hardware store at inflated prices and of poorer quality; those living in the factory barracks were absent for certain periods of time. The workers were not protected from bullying and insults from the owner and his henchmen. In Moscow, for example, until the early 90s of the 19th century. At the Karl Thiel and Co. factory, rods were used.
The wages were meager, barely enough to get by. The workers were thin and exhausted; they had practically no strength left to work, let alone somehow satisfy their needs.
Undoubtedly, this state of affairs could not help but cause discontent among the proletariat, which already in the 60-70s began to manifest itself in the form of spontaneous
speeches. In the 60s, there were unrest at factories in the Urals and in the central provinces (Maltsevsky plant in Kaluga province, Morozov factory in Orekhovo-Zuevo, etc.). In 1861 alone, there were 4 strikes and 12 unrest among industrial workers. The number of these protests grew rapidly (according to P.A. Khromov, over 200 strikes and 100 unrest were registered in the 70s). The strikes at the Neva Paper Mill (1870) and the Krenholm Manufactory (1872), which took place in close proximity to the capital of the empire, acquired particular scope.
The growing discontent of the workers, and then the emergence of Russian social democracy, became an important phenomenon in the Russian social movement of post-reform Russia. With the increase in the number of the proletariat, during the industrial revolution, its organization and cohesion grew, which led to attempts to create the first workers' organizations. In May 1875.
In Odessa, the “South Russian Union of Workers” arose, headed by E.O. Zaslavsky. The organization had its own charter, which formulated the main goal - the overthrow of the existing political system in the country through a violent coup. The organization was under the influence of populist ideology, which affected certain parts of the charter.
In December 1878, the “Northern Union of Russian Workers” was formed in San Petersburg, headed by V.P. Obnorsky and S.N. Khalturin, which included about 200 workers. The organization expressed its position in the appeal “To the Russian Workers,” which clearly indicated the need for political struggle, the demand for political freedom, and called on the workers to unite. The appeal spoke of the need to abolish private ownership of land and establish communal land ownership, creating workers' associations to organize production. Already in January of the following year, the government arrested members of this organization. S.N. Khalturin managed to escape from the police and subsequently became involved in terrorism.
In 1880, the first issue of the workers' newspaper "Rabochaya Zarya" was published, but the printing house was destroyed and the newspaper was confiscated, which actually meant the cessation of the organization's activities.
The workers' organizations of the 70s contributed to the growth of activity and unity of the Russian proletariat, introducing it to the experience and traditions of the international proletariat.
Formation of classes in capitalist society.
The position of the proletariat.
Labor movements of the 70s. The first workers' unions.
Labor movements of the 80s and 90s. Morozov strike.
The spread of Marxism in Russia.
After the reform of 1961, the decomposition of the class system in Russia began. Instead of estates, classes are formed: the bourgeoisie and the proletariat.
Formation of the bourgeoisie . The process of formation of the bourgeoisie began even before the reform of 1861. Usually in the village there was a resourceful man who bought certain goods from the peasants, took them to the fair and bought them at a higher price. Subsequently, all this increased in scale; at a certain stage, capital began to be invested not in turnover, but in production. There were 4 main sources of the formation of the bourgeoisie:
"Capitalist" peasants, among them the Morozovs, Guchkovs, Gorelins, Burilins, Konovalovs.
Pre-reform merchants.
Rich townsfolk.
The bourgeois nobility, among them Putilov.
The national composition of the bourgeoisie was quite varied. Among the largest entrepreneurs are Tereshchenko (Ukraine), as well as Baltic Germans and Jews. There were also many foreigners among entrepreneurs in Russia. Among the St. Petersburg and Moscow foreigners are Bromley, Bujon, Erickson, Nobili.
The class division still remained. Entrepreneurs belonged to the merchant class. After the reform of 61, the third guild was removed, leaving only two. To get there, you need to appear at the local government office, declare your capital and pay the guild fee. There is a change in the sociocultural appearance. The first generation of the bourgeoisie was not much different from ordinary peasants or townspeople, i.e. These were semi-literate men; in their clothes and in their lives they resembled these classes. The second and third generations continued to imitate the appearance of the nobility. They built luxurious mansions, bought expensive furniture, dishes, and fast horses. They began to receive higher education and traveled abroad. There is a gradual consolidation of the bourgeoisie. Representative organizations appear in the bourgeoisie (the Union of Oil Industrialists in Baku, the Union of Entrepreneurs of Metallurgists in the South of Russia), and later the first monopolies will grow from them.
The attitude of Russian society towards the bourgeoisie was rather negative. The play by Ostrovsky and other Russian classics portrays merchants in a bad light. The Kolupaevs and Razuvaevs are common names for merchants. This popular belief was not entirely true. Among the bourgeoisie were the Tretyakov brothers, Bakhrushin (founder of the theater museum in Moscow), Gorelin, Kurilin.
Formation of the proletariat. At the end of the 19th century. There were 1.5 million workers in Russia. And in total there were 10 million hired workers. They included farm laborers, transport workers, small industry workers, and unskilled laborers in logging. The composition of the proletariat is men, but gradually women began to be drawn into it. Entrepreneurs willingly accepted them, because women were calmer and not so demanding (N.G. Burylin generally kept only women at the factory). There were also many teenagers in the factories. Sources of formation:
Ruined peasants. The type of half-worker, half-peasant gradually emerged. In the summer he worked in the community, in the fall he was hired at a factory (the process of departure is “After the Intercession”). Around Easter, this worker left the factory and returned to the field again.
Ruined artisans. The hand weaver could compete with manufacture. But this artisan could no longer compete with the factory. The artisan, having gone bankrupt, often went to the factory, which ruined him.
Children of workers. This is the smallest source in terms of volume, but the most qualified.
During the Soviet period, the situation of workers was assessed extremely negatively, it was said that they were exploited to no end.
Since the late 80s (perestroika), everything has been the other way around. Historians say that the workers lived very well, and if anyone lived poorly, it was their own fault.
There were their own strata within the working class. The first layer is the labor aristocracy (Putilovites). In St. Petersburg they were 10%. But in the provinces there were fewer of them. This is a very narrow layer.
The second is the middle layer of workers. These are workers of mass professions. These are spinners, weavers, etc. The share of this layer was the largest - about 2/3 of all workers.
The third is the labor layer. These are workers who performed unskilled, hard and dirty work. They received pennies for this. This layer made up about ¼ of the peasants.
Working conditions and living conditions.
Working conditions. These are wages, working hours and sanitary conditions in the workplace.
Length of the working day, in the 70-80s. 13-14 hours a day. In 97 a law was passed limiting the working day to 11.5 hours. At the same time, it was indicated that there may be overtime work. Another important indicator is how many days off a worker has per year. The worker did not have vacation as such. But there were more holidays than now. In addition to 52 Sundays, there were many religious holidays. There was also a long break for workers on Easter. The work before Easter ended on Holy Week and began on St. Thomas Week (3 weeks in total). The wages then were not based on a fixed wage, but on a piece-rate basis. And the workers, therefore, simply lost part of their wages. There were few workers over 40 years of age.
Salary. Back then it was called a salary. The working aristocracy received 20-30 rubles a month, middle-class workers - 10-15 rubles, unskilled workers - 5-10 rubles (70-80s of the 19th century). The worker did not receive this salary in full. There were fines that were assessed for tardiness and absenteeism, and fines were also imposed for marriage. Soviet historiography said that sometimes fines reached half the salary - but this is not so. Workers with extensive experience received meager fines.
Sanitary and hygienic conditions. There was no TB (safety precautions) then. Therefore, there were frequent accidents in factories. Especially in the mining industries. In the textile industry and mechanical engineering such cases were rare. Injured workers were fired and were not paid any pension. The owner gave the worker a salary and sent him to all 4 directions. The temperature in the workshops was very high. In summer it sometimes reached 40 or 50% heat. That's why they walked around almost naked. In winter, on the contrary, we often got sick. There weren’t many ventilation systems in those days because they were expensive. Therefore, consumption and tuberculosis were common.
Living conditions. This includes housing, food, clothing and footwear, as well as forms of leisure activities.
Housing. There were types:
Master's housing provided by the owner of the enterprise. Existed only in large factories. Dormitories called barracks were built for single workers. There were beds there, often on two tiers. Several dozen people lived in one room. There was no furniture; the worker kept all his property in a chest under the bed. There was a great abundance of insects. For family workers there were komorki - a multi-storey dormitory with corridors, along which there were rooms - pencil cases.
Free apartments. These are houses that belonged to local residents, where they allowed guests for a certain fee. The newcomer workers did not rent a house or a room here, but only a corner. They let them in until the floor space was filled. They paid a ruble a month.
Own housing. This is a type characteristic of the labor aristocracy.
Nutrition. Types:
Artel nutrition. Workers of the same profession united in tavern artels. They included up to several dozen workers. They hired a cook. The owner allocated a room for such an artel. At lunchtime, the workers sat on benches at tables, and the cook laid out food for them. The workers ate cabbage soup, several of them from one bowl. The food was filling, but it was forced, what is served is what you eat.
Inn food. Each city had its own network of places where you could eat. These are taverns, buffets, snack bars. Food here was also cheap. The downside is that you could easily get poisoned.
Homemade food. This was the most preferred type. It was used by the labor aristocracy. The lunch break was then 2 hours.
Cost of food. For unskilled workers, 70% of their wages went towards food. The average worker has 20-30%. There is Eidel's law - The higher a person's income level, the less he spends on food.
Food range. Most workers ate bread and vegetables (black bread, cabbage, cucumbers, radishes). The working aristocracy consumed meat in various forms on all fast days. The middle layer of workers ate meat only on Sundays. And laborers indulged in meat only twice a year - at Christmas and Easter. At Easter the traditional dish was ham, at Christmas - goose. They ate fish more often. These are mainly river fish, not sea fish.
The main products are bread, sausage and vodka. Black bread cost 2 kopecks per pound, white bread - 5 kopecks per pound, sausage - started from 15 kopecks, and up to 40-50 kopecks. per pound, vodka - they took it in buckets (12 liters) - 10 rubles, 40 kopecks - a bottle.
Most of the workers had second-hand clothes and shoes. Only working aristocrats wore new clothes. Mostly they wore a jacket, in winter a coat with cotton wool, and either boots or boots on their feet.
Form of leisure activities. Initially, it was not there, only if it was on Sunday. But gradually leisure began to appear.
Traditional forms of leisure include round dances and gatherings. Among the new forms of leisure: fist fights. The intelligentsia and clergy tried to establish more civilized forms of leisure: religious and moral readings began to be held in factories, doctors and priests spoke to factory owners. We often gave presentations - with slides. The lectures were historical, geographical and natural science.
The situation of the majority of the workers was bad, this was the main reason for the labor movements.
Labor movements of the 70s. The first workers' unions. There are 2 forms of worker protest - unrest and strikes. Unrest was a primitive form of protest, reminiscent of a peasant revolt. They were accompanied by the destruction of production facilities and the breaking of machines. The workers broke cars, broke windows at the factory, they did not make any special demands, after letting off steam, they obediently returned to work.
Since the 70s Strikes are becoming increasingly popular. Strike and strike. Strike is a Russian word, and strike is an English word.
1870 - a strike occurred at the Nevskaya paper spinning mill. Several hundred workers took part in it; the main demand was to increase wages. This was the first strike that agitated the public. The public reacted sympathetically to the workers. The state also responded to this: the conspirators were expelled from the city and received administrative punishment.
In 1872, a strike occurred at the Krenholm manufactory (Narva). Several thousand workers had already taken part in the strike. Among the strikers were both Russians and Estonians. This was the first performance in Russia when the authorities had to release military force - 2 regiments.
In addition, strikes took place at the Putilov plant, at the textile factories of Ivanovo-Voznesensk Moscow, at the gold mines of Siberia, and at the construction of railways.
Another important event was the Kazan demonstration. It was organized by the populists in 1876, the initiators were landowners. The bulk were still workers. For the first time at this demonstration, the red flag was raised. Student Georgy Plekhanov gave a speech at it. The demonstration was dispersed by police and shopkeepers.
The workers felt a desire to unite. The first workers' unions appeared.
1. South Russian Workers' Union. (1875, Odessa). The founder of the union was the impoverished nobleman Evgeny Zaslavsky. The remaining members of the union are ordinary workers. Branches of the union were later created in Chisinau. The union consisted of several circles of 5-6 workers each. These were literate workers who read revolutionary books, which they distributed to other workers. The core of workers numbered 50 people. And also + 200 people who were supporters of this union. There was a charter and at the same time a program, which stated that the ultimate goal was to get rid of capital through a revolutionary coup. Any worker can be a member of the union. This union did not last long. A provocateur wormed his way into the ranks of the union, he handed the union over to the police, the leaders were arrested, and the organization collapsed.
2. In 1878, the “Northern Union of Russian Workers” arose in St. Petersburg. The organization was headed by two people. The first is Viktor Obnorsky, the second is Stepan Khalturin. The first traveled through Western Europe and knew well the work and life of Western workers. I knew that workers in the West live better. The union included about 200 activists and about 200 sympathizers. The union was closely connected with “Land and Freedom”. He adopted the structure of the organization from the populists. Those. there was a central circle and branches on the outskirts of St. Petersburg. "Land and Freedom" allowed the union to use their printing house. The “Appeal to the Russian Workers” was printed in this printing house. In essence, this was a union program. The ultimate goal is to overthrow the landowners and bourgeoisie, give the land to the community, and the factories to the workers. The immediate goal is the introduction of democratic freedoms in Russia, the prohibition of child labor, and the reduction of the working day.
In 1880, Obnorsky was arrested, and Khalturin joined Narodnaya Volya and organized the explosion of the Winter Palace.
Labor movements of the 80s. Morozov strike. In the first half of the 80s. Russia is experiencing a crisis of overproduction. This worsened the situation of the workers: dozens of factories were closed, workers were thrown onto the streets. At other enterprises, wages or working hours were reduced. This led to strikes.
The largest action was the Morozov strike. The Morozovs are the largest entrepreneurs in Russia. About 12 thousand people worked at the factory. This factory was owned by Timofey Savich Morozov, the manufacturer was an Old Believer. There was no middle class in Orekhovo-Zuevo; there were owners and workers.
In the first half of the 80s. Timofey reduced workers' wages several times. The tavern shop caused particular dissatisfaction. The workers were paid not in money, but in coupons in this shop. The prices of this shop were inflated, and the goods were of poor quality. The clerks also shamelessly deceived and cheated the workers. Master Shorin also caused great dissatisfaction. Salaries at the manufactory were not issued every month, but sometimes once every 2 or 3 months.
The strike was not spontaneous, but prepared in advance. The main role was played by the worker Pyotr Moiseenko, who was not a local resident, but worked in St. Petersburg. I knew Khalturin. Vasily Volkov became his assistant. On the eve of the strike, they gathered workers several times under the guise of a tea party. We appointed people responsible for the workshops and agreed on all the little things.
January 1885 – Morozov strike. At the beginning of it, the workers first rushed to the tavern shop and destroyed it. Master Shorin's apartment was destroyed. After this, the workers no longer allowed such anarchic actions, and the strike began to be carried out calmly. The following demands were put forward:
Pay wages in cash, not coupons
Issue it regularly, twice a month
Publish a law that would limit the size of fines!!! (political requirement)
Morozov refused to comply with these demands. Troops were called. The Vladimir governor arrived. Arrests were made among the workers and the conspirators were arrested. The strike is over.
In 1986, a trial of the Morozov strikers took place in Vladimir. They were charged under one hundred and one articles. At the trial, the picture of the harsh situation of the workers became clear, and Moscow lawyers also tried. As a result: the jury acquitted the perpetrators on all charges.
This strike for the first time publicly identified the existence of a “labor question” in Russia. This is about the plight of the workers, how to improve it, the problem with the strike movement.
Under the influence of the strike in 1986, a law on fines was passed. In it, fines were limited (see lecture Internal Policy of Alexander 3).
The influence of the Morozov strike was also reflected in the fact that in the second half of the 80s. The labor movement increased sharply. Before this there were 19 annual strikes, now there are 32 strikes. The largest were in St. Petersburg, Moscow province, and in the Yaroslavl Big Manufactory (YaBM).
The significance of the Morozov strike is that it stimulated the labor movement, it was the first not spontaneous, but a prepared movement, and the first political demand was put forward.
Labor movements of the 90s. The number of the proletariat increased sharply. This was facilitated by famine and crop failure in 91. Tens of thousands of peasants went bankrupt and went to the city. Every year, not thousands, but tens of thousands of people went on strike.
Especially in 96-97. - a series of strikes in St. Petersburg - “Petersburg Industrial War”. The impetus for this was the question of payment during coronation days. On coronation days, the workers were sent home. The workers demanded to be paid for these days, the factory owners refused, and then the workers rebelled. The Putilovsky, Nevsky and Obukhovsky factories rebelled. Textile workers joined the metalworkers. The strikes made an impression on the authorities and society. The workers were paid for their coronation days.
Characteristic features of the labor movement at the end of the 19th century:
It was of an economic nature, the demands were standard (increase salaries, reduce working hours, improve living conditions, etc.);
The strikes were mainly defensive rather than offensive, with workers reacting to deteriorating working conditions;
The workers had no experience of labor conflicts, so they were often defeated;
Among the workers, leaders emerge, strike leaders who have charisma.
The spread of Marxism in Russia. Marxism as a theory appeared in Western Europe in the mid-19th century. Marx wrote Capital, in three volumes, and the Communist Manifesto. The Russian public became acquainted with the works in the 60s. In 1972, the first volume of Capital was translated into Russian. But the public believed that Marx’s works were not suitable for Russia. Several Russian emigrant revolutionaries were part of the first international, which was divided into several sections, including a Russian section. The latter was headed by Utin.
The first Russian Marxist organization arose in 1983. Its founder was the leader of the former “Black Redistribution”, Plekhanov and his associates - Vera Zasulich, Axelrod, Deitch, Ignatov. Plekhanov was born in the Tambov province into a family with revolutionary traditions. Plekhanov went to St. Petersburg to study and entered the Mining Institute. He was one of the leaders of Land and Freedom. He spoke during the Kazan demonstration. After that, he went illegal. Later he moved abroad. This group existed abroad, in Geneva. First of all, the group issued a document on the publication of books “Library of Modern Socialism”. The group members translated the works of Marx and Engels. Then they were printed and transported to Russia. Plekhanov also wrote original Marxist works, where Marxism was adapted to Russian conditions, two works - “Socialism and Political Struggle” and “Our Differences”.
Plekhanov clearly formulated the differences between Marxists and Narodniks:
The populists argued that Russia would pass the stage of capitalism, and the Marxists said that Russia was already in the stage of capitalism;
The populists considered the peasants to be the most revolutionary class, and the Marxists considered the proletariat to be the most revolutionary class.
In addition to such serious work, the group began to publish the “Workers' Library,” books for ordinary workers. These were complex brochures, written in simple language, and published in large editions.
The formation of the Liberation from Labor group and its publishing activities first caused confusion among the remnants of the populists, and then rage.
In addition to this group, Marxist organizations are emerging in Russia itself. At the very end of 1983, a circle arose in St. Petersburg, headed by Dmitry Blagoev. It was called: “Party of Russian Social Democrats.” Literature came to them from abroad. This group published 2 issues of the Rabochiy newspaper. After Blagoev was arrested, the circle disbanded.
In the mid-80s. A new circle of Social Democrats arose, headed by Togissky.
It was called the “Association of St. Petersburg Craftsmen.” It included both intellectuals and workers. When the leaders of the circle were arrested, the lower circles of workers remained.
The third organization arose in 1989 - the Brusnev circle. It was a larger organization. L.B. Krasin and F. Afanasyev were also members of it. Propaganda among the workers was carried out according to a special plan: the workers were first taught to read and write, then they were given information on history, natural science and the basics of political economy, and after that the workers began to be given real Marxist literature.
At the turn of the 80-90s. mugs appear in the provinces. The circle in Kazan occupies a special place. It was led by N.E. Fedoseev (Lenin's teacher).
In the 80s Marxism affected the Russian public relatively little. He seemed exotic to her. The circles were mainly attended by intellectuals. V. Ulyanov joins the Marxist movement.
Ulyanov was born in 1880, a nobleman by birth. His father was a major official - the director of public schools in the Simbirsk province, with the rank of state councilor. When Lenin was 15 years old, his father died. The whole family lived on pensions and Lenin did not work anywhere. When Vladimir was 17 years old, his older brother Alexander was caught preparing for the assassination attempt on Alexander 3. Alexander was executed along with several people, this is one of the reasons for Lenin’s entry into the revolutionary path. When Lenin found out about this, he said: “We will take a different path.”
In 1989 he graduated with honors from the Simbirsk gymnasium. He enters Kazan University and after six months he is expelled. After this, Vladimir joined N. Fedoseev’s circle. Lenin applies to the University of St. Petersburg for law school, and passes the exams as an external student. He qualified as a lawyer. He goes to Samara and becomes a lawyer there. He undertook to defend workers and peasants, but did not win a single case. After that, he did not work anywhere until 1917.
In the first half of the 90s. Marxism is capturing more and more people. In particular, Fedoseev organized a circle in Vladimir. In 1894, V. Ulyanov came to see him.
In 1892, a circle arose in Ivanovo. It was led by F. Kondratyev, a student at one of the St. Petersburg universities. The circle consisted mainly of workers, also N. Kudryashov and M. Bagaev.
Social-democratic circles arise on the national outskirts of Russia. The Social Democracy of the Kingdom of Poland and Lithuania (SDKPiL) party was known; it included J. Marchlewski and Rosa Luxenburg.
A “Bund” (union) also emerges among Jewish workers.
In 1895, the “Union of Struggle for the Emancipation of the Working Class” arose in St. Petersburg. The leaders are V. Ulyanov, who moved to St. Petersburg, and Yu. Tsederbaum (Martov). The organization had 3 levels: at the head of the union was the center, below were workers' organizations on the outskirts of St. Petersburg, at the lowest level were circles in factories and factories. The Union moved from narrow propaganda to broad agitation. The union had its own illegal printing house that printed leaflets and proclamations. At one of the factories, there was unrest among workers dissatisfied with the reduction in wages. Through its circle, the union found out about this and printed leaflets - “What are the weavers demanding?” The leaflet provoked a workers' strike. The same situation was repeated at the Putilov plant. The union became so emboldened that it began sending such leaflets to the authorities. The authorities became concerned about this and began to look for the source. They managed to reach the leaders through their agents. At the end of the 90s. they captured the leaders.
This union was followed by other struggle unions. They arose in Moscow, Kyiv and Ivanovo-Voznesensk. In March 98, the Minsk Congress of the RSDLP was held. Subsequently, this party changed its name several times. A minority of Social Democratic organizations were represented at the congress; the central region was practically not represented. There were a total of 9 delegates at the congress. No program was chosen, only a Central Committee was elected, but after the meeting the central committee was arrested. The problems were resolved only at the second congress in 1903.
Vladimir Ulyanov was sentenced to 3 years of exile for his activities in the St. Petersburg Union; he was sent to eastern Siberia, to the village of Shushenskoye. Nadezhda Krupskaya, his wife, and his mother-in-law came there to see him. Ulyanov wrote a number of works in exile. Among these works, “The Development of Capitalism in Russia” occupies a special place, where he summarized his acquired experience. He published many works under the pseudonym Nikolai Lenin, and then simply Lenin.
At the beginning of 1900, Lenin's term ended; he could return to the European part of the country, but he was banned from capitals and university cities. He chose Pskov as his home. I stayed here for several months. At the end of 1900, the authorities allowed him to go abroad. Lenin leaves for Germany and begins to publish the Social Democratic newspaper Iskra, together with Plekhanov. On the front page of every newspaper was the slogan: “From a spark to a flame.”
Since the end of the 19th century there has been an increase in the number of the proletariat.
At the turn of the century – 11.8 million people
By 1913 - 17.8 million workers (1.5 times increase)
But at the same time, I would like to note that this number applied to the entire population as 1%. Not everyone worked in large enterprises and not everyone was separated from the means of production. The main source of accommodation is salary, but this is not the case here.
70% of handicraft enterprises.
The proletariat in the full sense of the word out of 17.8 million was only 2 million => politically they were in the minority. From this we can conclude that the process of formation of the proletariat in Russia was at the very beginning, both in quantitative and qualitative composition. Why?
The source of hired labor was the peasantry (91% of the workers were peasants, mostly otkhodniks (in 1901 - 91.8%)). The criterion for the formation of the proletariat can be considered the circumstance when the workers are hereditary (i.e. in the second and further generations, as for example in England), while in Russia these are “yesterday’s” or even “today’s” peasants who have retained a close connection with the village .
Statistics:
in the textile industry
31% - families in the village
56.5% - had an allotment in the village
6% - who were born in Moscow, so to speak, hereditary
Heavy engineering
45.6% - connection with the village. Less, but still almost half.
In 1900-1913. The concentration of workers in large enterprises has increased noticeably. It reached its highest level in the cotton and metallurgical industries. Compared to them, it was lower in the engineering, mining and sugar industries. In large industrial cities, especially in St. Petersburg, 60% of industrial workers were employed in enterprises employing over 1000 people. Powerful capitalist enterprises united and rallied workers into large collectives. Their unity was strengthened by common professional interests and goals in the collective defense of their rights. Industrial workers had the highest literacy rates. The increase in cultural level also contributed to the growth of political activity of workers.
The Russian working class was younger than all other social groups of the population, which were distinguished by a predominance of young people. According to the 1897 census, among factory and mining workers, 26% of workers were under the age of 20, 55% were from 20 to 39 years old, and only 19% were 40 years old and older. Even before the war, there was a gradual displacement of men by women, who made up 26% of factory workers in 1900 and 32% in 1913. During the First World War, the proportion of women increased to 40%.
You can split the class like:
A class in itself (they do not recognize themselves as a class and do not understand that they have common interests and need to fight for them. The initial stage of the formation of the working class.)
A class for itself (recognizes itself as a class, fights for its rights).
In Russia, the first category is mainly represented. They had a low classification and short work experience (for example, in Ivanovo 52% - up to 5 years of experience; 28.6% - 1 year). This was due to the fact that the peasants went to the city as additional income, and therefore not for long. All this led to low labor productivity.
The situation of the workers was terrible: they were paid little, working and living conditions were poor. Salary (per year):
1897 – 192 rub.
1901 – 200rub
1905 – 240 rub.
1913 – 300rub
The increase was due to two things:
Inflation
1905- strikes => achieved a 20% increase
But wages remained low. 2.5 times lower than in England; 2 times than in Germany.
Another problem was the gap between the standard of living of an ordinary worker and a skilled one.
Ordinary workers (67%) received 30-50 rubles a year
500-800 rubles per year qualified (0.5%)
Salaries were delayed and payments were made in goods from the enterprise. At the same time, when they gave money, they forced the worker to buy goods in the employer’s shop (with a markup) => foreign economic coercion.
Fines were practiced => kept, so much so that the worker had to stay.
The working day in Europe at this time was already 9 hours (England, Germany). In Russia – 12-14 hours..
In 1897, some measures were taken, but only for workers of state-owned enterprises (10.5 hours, social guarantees, pensions)
The example of the Tretyakov textile factory is very interesting: 9 o’clock, maternity hospital, school, hospital, cheap but good housing was built for workers. The workers had actions, mutual assistance, one can even talk about the so-called social partnership. But there are very few such examples.
The worker received 10-12 rubles per month:
6 rubles - housing (barracks, natural ventilation)
4-6 rubles - food
A worker spent 30-70 rubles on clothes (per year).
At the same time, salaries could be given not in money, but in goods that still needed to be sold.
The salary barely provided for physical survival. Now let's move on to one more component:
Socio-political situation.
In the Soviet tradition, it was believed that the Russian proletariat was the most conscious and politically developed. BUT! this is a clear exaggeration.
Mostly young people lived in the city:
Age: from 20 to 30 years – 2/3 of all; more than 40 – 13%.
Literacy - 60 - 70% among workers. received primary education.
The worker was distinguished by his clothes - factory clothes - jacket, vest, watch chain, cap; formal wear – lacquered cap. Women wear a woolen dress, high lace-up shoes, and heels. The main dance is quadrille.
Drunkenness, rudeness, promiscuity, profanity, they denied the old culture, but did not form a new one => frustration, marginal position, which was often confused with revolutionism.
The traditions were strong:
From the peasantry:
The attitude towards royal power as a protector, sanctified by the church, is “naive peasant monorchism.” Some workers adhered.
The issue of social justice: the attitude towards social revolution and propaganda is mostly negative. , because ideas were brought from outside, although if you look at it this way, the workers themselves were spontaneous socialists. The modern system is not fair; the slogan “down with autocracy” was directed against officials, bourgeoisie, and landowners).
The basis of social justice: work ethic, work is the source of life, land for life, life was given by God => land for all => rejection of private property. Land can only belong to those who work. The same attitude applies to capitalists. They did not accept the exploitation of hired labor.
Attitude to the revolution:
It is necessary to fight, but a skeptical attitude towards the political struggle => indifference to the political struggle. Therefore, even in strike movements with economic demands, only 6% (Kurbskaya talks about this in her memoirs)
Very low percentage of participation in parties: 0.05% - deliberately in parties. The majority followed not the Social Democrats, but the monarchists (for example, the Union of the Russian People, the Black Hundred).
The degree of organization is low (even in the West, where there are trade unions, they mainly advocate economic demands).
In Russia, trade unions appeared after the first revolution and were semi-legal.
Emergence of committees:
Special form: Soviets (in Ivanovo 1905)
They emerged as a strike leadership body. An asset was chosen, with its own functions and tasks; over time, they ceased to be a government body that existed in parallel with the government, and assumed control over the territories.
The principles of universality, chosen from among oneself, decisions are made and carried out by oneself (reminiscent of peasant self-government), there is no separation of powers, there is no bureaucracy. => Soviet power, one might say, grew out of the historical roots of the peasant community.
At the head of the patriarchal community is the father, a Bolshak, which is why the Bolsheviks were perceived well.
9. Peasantry in Russia: sources of formation, numbers, composition, socio-political and socio-cultural characteristics.
The most massive class in Russia, of course, remained the peasantry (92 million people - 77% of the population)
Their legal status changes (after the reforms of the 1860s):
Right of free movement
Protecting your interests in court
The right of peasant self-government, etc.
BUT all this is limited by the temporary obligation, the preservation of corporal punishment. All this made the peasants, as it were, conditionally free. During the years of counter-reforms, the legal status is even more limited. Decree of 1893 - it was actually prohibited to buy out plots ahead of schedule. Redistributions and divisions of large families were prohibited; in 1889, the institution of zemstvo chiefs was introduced - in fact, the abolition of peasant self-government. “Zemstvo rapists” were appointed from among the nobles who were military men.
In addition, the peasantry was subject to shadow taxes (kulaks are wealthy peasants)
This is if you add to the fact that they paid taxes and redemption payments.
All this was aggravated by illiteracy. Multiply by the problem of land shortage. As a result, they feel like the lowest class. Civil inferiority - the agrarian question gave this particular urgency.
Plus differentiation of the peasantry
Rural poor (had less than 5 dessiatines, without draft animals - 26.4% are practically no longer peasants. This means that the main source of their income was hired labor)
1-5 desyatins, but there is 1 workhorse. Still, such a poor man will be forced to supplement his budget either by labor or by hired work in the village 20.3%
2 working horses, 8-10 acres 40.4% middle peasants. Sometimes in good years he even has a surplus; in general he barely makes ends meet
From 10 or more dessiatines, work horses from 2 or more, seeders, winnowers, plus more often hired labor. 12.9%
Almost every second peasant who could not live off his household
In civil terms, everyone is the same.
In material and cultural terms, the poor can be called the rural proletariat. They are essentially no longer peasants; they cannot run their own households.
The extreme groups are growing, and the middle one is decreasing. The marginal part brings the village closer to revolution.
Marx-the disappearance of the peasantry as a class is inevitable. Small farming cannot compete with large farming. Marx had a negative attitude towards the peasantry, believing that it was a reactionary class.
The peasantry will of course strive for self-preservation.
Approximately the same position was held ( Struve) and Russian social democrats(Plekhanov) believed that the proletariat should form a bloc with the bourgeoisie itself, and not with the peasantry.
There was a slightly different point of view Lenin. After the first Russian revolution, I realized that without the support of the proletarian struggle by the peasantry, nothing would come of it in Russia. The duality of the peasantry: 1-hard worker - close to the workers, 2-small owner. And in this sense, he opposes the proletariat. Lenin understood that the peasantry in Russia - the outcome of the revolution depended on whose side the peasantry was on. And during the period of the bourgeois-democratic revolution it is necessary to form a bloc with the peasantry.
Trotsky- “two-faced Janus” (the Roman god) called the peasantry that way. He also means Lenin’s terms of reference. But unlike Lenin. If Lenin, by virtue of tradition, characteristic of the intelligentsia, understood that the peasantry was the bearer of national principles. Some kind of idealization of the peasantry was characteristic of populism. This influenced Lenin. But Trotsky saw the proletarian revolution as an international revolution, and he believed that the national factor would weaken the proletarian revolution. Therefore, for him, the peasantry is more of a reactionary class.
Close to this point of view is the proletarian writer Gorky. For him, the proletariat class, which is even endowed with knightly nobility, goes out to open struggle. But the peasant can betray the cause of the revolution at any moment as soon as he receives land. That is, he saw this possessive nature of the peasant! The peasant has no interests other than his own farm!
Gorky's point of view is closer to Trotsky's.
Diametrically opposed views on the peasantry - Tolstoy Lev. For him, the peasantry is the bearer of national values! A worker who leaves the land for the city, his consciousness is deformed. Easy urban labor corrupts! The proletariat considered it deprived of connection with its native culture.
Close to Tolstoy's TK neo-populists. Continued in the Socialist Revolutionary program. The ideologist was Chernov of the neo-populists, who became the leader of the Socialist Revolutionary Party. In Chernov’s works, the idea that the blood-labor class and the bearer of national identity was substantiated. Community consciousness. Land should be common property. Ownership of land is conditioned by the fact that land is an application of labor. At the same time, it also speaks of the duality of the peasantry. For the liquidation of private property, but again labor rights - if I put my labor into this land, then it is mine.
For now, the desire for nationalization prevails. But it is possible that it may swing in the other direction.
DURING THE FIRST RUSSIAN REVOLUTION, THE MOST OF PEASANTS advocated the nationalization of their own property. Even the wealthy. This meant that they were not yet too keen on capitalism.
Social Revolutionaries (social revolutionaries)-until the historical moment is missed, it is necessary to carry out socialization (there is no legal dog at all, everyone is a dog). And (Social Democrats) Lenin-nationalization (transfer to state ownership. Legal ownership, and the rest only for use, which can be assigned hereditarily).
Thus, we see that contemporaries saw the dual nature of peasant consciousness. This was true.
Supporters of neo-populism (Chayanov, Kondratiev) saw economic progress precisely in the development of peasant farming. We see that small peasant farms are even more resistant to fluctuations than large ones. It will exist in all eras (Both feudalism and capitalism) This is an interformation class. They endow the peasantry as a class with the best traits that are inherent in our people. PEASANT FARMING IS A TYPE OF MORAL ECONOMY (the bourgeoisie’s goal is to make a profit, and the peasant’s goal is to feed himself. Surplus in order to exchange for something else). Our peasant was a scoop))) We are accustomed to an unpretentious lifestyle. Because of religion. Because this is secondary. Hence the attitude towards work: work is the measure of all values, but on the other hand, a peasant is not a workaholic. Work is in order to maintain life status, and the soul must think about the salvation of the soul. Orthodox holidays. The Russian walks and works from dawn to dusk. Lenin, who himself was raised in Protestant traditions, does not understand this.
The peasants did not like to plow with a plow - deep plowing). Shallow plowing is an achievement of national economy. Plow-diversion. It did more harm than good. It was produced by the Germans. Academicians did not understand this, but the peasants knew it on an intuitive level.
Labor as a means for spiritual work. Holiday of the soul. Freedom of the soul. Now, of course, the view is different - purely Protestant. This means that our consciousness is changing.
Carriers of urban culture penetrated into the village at the beginning of the 20th century. At the same time, this was also a factor in the revolutionization of the Russian village. During the first winter months of the revolution, the peasantry is silent. Only since April has there been a wave of strike movement among the peasantry. They were not walking in sync.
Socialism, such an attitude towards one’s own property was inherent in the peasant himself.
The peasants were completely apolitical. From the beginning of the 20th century, Socialist Revolutionary propaganda began to actively infiltrate the villages.
Concluding the description of the peasantry, it must be said that it changed a lot at the beginning of the 20th century. It remained unified in socio-cultural and legal terms. And in social and mating there is a stratification.
Now in more detail:
At the end of the 19th - beginning of the 20th centuries. The economic and social appearance of the village changed significantly. The peasantry was losing its former patriarchal appearance. The most significant changes occurred in the composition of the peasantry, its land management, economic activities, and its very way of life changed as a result of the Stolypin agrarian reform. There was a breakdown of community orders. Millions of peasants, leaving the community, sold their plots to the wealthy part of the village and rushed to the cities, joining the ranks of hired workers in factories and factories. Some peasants moved to Siberia. The luckier ones were able to establish their own farms.
Nevertheless, the community, despite its violent breakup, was not destroyed, demonstrating its stability and vitality. The agrarian-peasant issue was not resolved, the severity of social contradictions in the village was not removed. Conditions remained for a powerful agrarian movement in the countryside, which made itself known in the summer of 1917.
The stratification of the peasantry into groups of different property status occurred at an accelerated pace. In 1897, 81.4 million people, or 87% of the population, lived in rural areas in the 50 provinces of European Russia, but only 69.4 million, or 74%, were engaged in agriculture. The other 12 million indicated that their main occupation was commercial, industrial and other activities, i.e. they ceased to be farmers. According to land ownership statistics of 1905, already 17 million peasants were not engaged in agricultural labor. The group of landless peasants increased in the villages.
De-peasantization also occurred as a result of the relocation of peasants to cities. In the Epifansky district of the Tula province, according to the 1911 household census, those who left the village at the end of the 19th - beginning of the 20th centuries. the peasants were distributed as follows: before 1895, 26% left, in 1896-1900. - 14, in 1901-1905. - 19 and for 1906-1919. - 40%. With each five-year period, the departure from the village increased. Some of them went to the outskirts.
The stratification of the peasantry into groups of poor, middle and wealthy peasants acquired a new character during this period. In addition to the quantitative growth of the layer of low-power, and at the other extreme - wealthy owners, qualitative changes associated with commodity-market relations also developed. For the poor, this was an intensive expansion of areas of employment: crafts, hiring for temporary work, individual family members leaving to earn money, etc. Wealthy owners were characterized by the use of hired labor (most often temporary, seasonal, piecework), the purchase of private land, the acquisition of improved machines and tools, fertilizers, and an increase in rent. Thus, the existence of both layers was interconnected and interdependent, otherwise the poor would be doomed to complete impoverishment and starvation due to the continuous fragmentation of plots between heir-sons, and the rural rich and landowners would not have a wage labor market.
First of all, the stratification was noticeable in the amount of allotment land per yard. The biggest difference in this case was between communities in different regions of the country. Thus, in the agricultural center there were many communities with average plots of 3-6 dessiatines. to the yard; in the non-chernozem zone 7-10; in the Volga region 12-15; in Novorossiya 15-20, etc. All-Russian data reflect precisely regional differences, as well as differences between categories of peasants: former landowners, on average, had plots of 6.7 dessiatines in 1905; former state - 12.5 each; Baltic peasants - 36.9; Bashkirs -28.2; Cossacks 52.7 dec.
Within communities, allotment land was distributed, as a rule, more evenly, in proportion to the number of male souls, and welfare depended on the number of family workers, but most often on the size of leased and deeded land. All survey data prove that the wealthiest households rented and bought more land, thereby increasing the degree of stratification. For example, the difference in the provision of allotment land within communities between the poor (sowing up to 3 dessiatines) and the wealthy (sowing more than 10 dessiatines) was 2-3 times, for rented land - 5-10 times, for deeds of sale - in 50 or more times (data for districts of Perm, Samara and Saratov provinces).
Taxes placed a heavy burden on the peasants. In addition to direct taxes, which from 1901 to 1912 decreased from allotment lands by 20%, the villages accounted for the majority of indirect taxes, and the latter were constantly growing. Only the taxation of vodka increased from 144 to 256 million rubles, sugar from 27 to 46 million rubles, tobacco, oil products, matches - one and a half times. All tax payments per capita of the rural population in 1901 accounted for 8.7 rubles, in 1912 - 10.18 rubles. However, the share of taxes as a percentage of income over these years decreased from 28.7 to 23.7, which indicated a faster growth in farm profitability. According to budget surveys of peasants in the Voronezh province, direct taxes amounted to 10% of income for the poor, 5.4% for the wealthy, and more indirect taxes fell on rich households.
The presence of different social groups makes it difficult to decide whether, on average, the Russian peasantry became impoverished during this period. Peasant spending on consumer goods increased steadily (almost doubling over 10 years), the cash deposits of peasants in savings banks and credit cooperatives increased, and quite significantly, and the earnings of farm laborers and peasants in waste industries grew. In 1900-1914. grain production per capita increased, as well as the production of meat, dairy products, eggs - even taking into account exports.