Continuation from here.
For any Westerner who
ever tries to get an honest grasp of the Russian modern history (19th
Century till present) detaching oneself from own historical, Western, in
general, and American especially, experiences is a must. Those are absolutely inapplicable
to Russia with a sole exceptions of Western liberal influences the way those
were consumed, converted, Russified that is, and transplanted by what is known
as Russian 19th century intelligentsia—overwhelmingly Russian in its
origin. The ever important Russian issue of the land, serfdom, peasant commune
(aka Mir) and backwardness when compared to the West is what drove Russian history
in the 19th century. Of course, Russia's intellectual and art history
of a period is very important. As Aileen Kelly noted in her introduction to
Isiah Berlin's wonderful collection of essays known as Russian Thinkers:
The view that despotic socialism was no more than Russia deserved would be accepted by many western liberals as not unjust, at least with regard to the 'devils' of Dostoevsky novel, the Russian radical intelligentsia. In the degree of their alienation from their society and their impact on it, the Russian intelligentsia of the 19th century were a phenomenon almost sui genereis. Their ideological leaders were a small group with the cohesiveness and sense of mission of a religious sect. In their fervent moral opposition to the existing order, their single-minded preoccupation with ideas and their faith in reason and science, they paved the way for the Russian Revolution, and thereby achieved major historical significance.
What is left to ask, in
this case, is WHAT made Russian intelligentsia so "radical"? Western
liberal ideas? Sure, in the end, most of this intelligentsia, from radical Westernizers
such as Chaadaev, Vissarion Belinsky or Alexander Herzen, to Leo Tolstoy (who
actively read Jean Jacques Rousseau while writing War and Peace), to Turgenev,
who happened to be the "resident" of Russian intelligence in Paris,
were all people who knew Western Europe first hand, lived there for long
periods of time and in general had means to dedicate themselves to intellectual
endeavors. It matters, of course, that overwhelming majority of this intelligentsia
were Russians, not Jews, and many were aristocrats and nobility. Yet, they
stood, radically at that, in opposition to "regime". How so, which is especially notable for the
thinking and writing of Nikolai Nekrasov or Leo Tolstoy who were land owners
and owned serfs? The answer is in the question.
Anybody, who ever visited
Sevastopol and bothered to visit all of its places of combat glory in Crimean
War (1854-56), from Fourth Bastion, where young officer Count Leo Tolstoy
served and wrote his Sevastopol Sketches, to a Malakhov Kurgan memorial
complex, to a magnificent (stunning really) Roubad's
Panorama Siege of Sevastopol at Historic Boulevard, one would be
struck, while walking through expositions, with few things. For starters, one
is always struck with a small size of the uniforms of Russian soldiers and
sailors presented in those expositions. Make no mistake, we all know that
people were smaller then, but between stunning Patriotic War of 1812 exposition
in Moscow's Historical Museum and those of 1854-55 there is very little
difference in sizes. I, personally, was always struck by this fact. And then,
of course, the guide who would be taking you through weapons' exposition
underneath the main floor of Panorama will tell you, that while fighting
combined forces of Great Britain, France and Turkey, trying to defend
Sevastopol, Russians were armed with smooth bore muskets. The invaders—they had
rifles. Those rifles had a much greater range than Russian muskets. Well, that,
plus they were dramatically more accurate. Russia lost that war and abandoned
Sevastopol. Humiliating for Russia Treaty of Paris was signed in 1856 and, far
from this "radical intelligentsia's" condemnations of Czarism, the
voices of condemnation were heard from Czar's own family. As Grand Duke
Konstantin stated:
We cannot deceive ourselves any longer; we must say that we are both weaker and poorer than the first-class powers, and furthermore poorer not only in material terms but in mental resources, especially in matters of administration.
Needless to say, combined
naval Anglo-French squadron had more screw driven ships than whole of Russian
Navy. Here we come to an important juncture—Russian intelligentsia, which was,
sometimes not without the merit, accused of wishing a defeat to Russian Czarism
in Crimean War, was not just doing that out of hatred to the regime—it was the
means to an end. Obviously, many falsifiers of Russian history, such as
Solzhenitsyn, consistently refused, out of faux patriotism, to attribute
Russia's humiliating defeat in Crimean War to actual serious economic, material,
cultural and organizational backwardness. The fault was squarely placed with
those people in Russia who called for this defeat. Fine, many did call for that
and that doesn't make them right, but this fact in no way removes, even under
constant whining of all kinds of "patriots" about aggressive West
(anybody in their own mind blames rain for being wet?) and presentation of
myriad of petty excuses for a loss, the fact that when it really mattered
Russia had no (with the exception of some Russian naval ships which were first
in the world to utilize Paixhans
Guns in naval combat) economic and technological wherewithal to deal with
premier military and economic powers of the era. Truth was—Russia, for all her
creative genius waking up, remained a profoundly backward agrarian society not
fit to compete with emerging industrial powerhouses of Europe and North
America. Crimean War exposed this sad fact completely.
In the foundation of this
backwardness WAS serfdom (virtual slavery) of Russian peasantry, medieval level
of agriculture and cultural set up of Russian village, Russian peasants' Mir—a commune
which pursued only one objective, survival of people who were counted for
nothing by Russian aristocracy and nobility, who owned them. The warranted, in
fact, irresistible question is this case is this: in what sense Jews, who
themselves lived in Pales of Settlement, are related to this core issue of
Russian history? Sure as hell, Jews didn't invent serfdom. Nor did they invent
transition of Russia to absolutism under conditions of evolution to absolute
serfdom (see Sobornoye
Ulozhenie (Соборное уложение, "Code of Law"—in Russian) and
virtual locking Russia into feudal economy, while the West's absolutism was
growing together with the growth of industrial capitalist forces.
Horrors of serfdom and
its profound and long lasting debilitating influence on Russia are well
documented and require no additional elaboration, enough to start counting
peasant uprisings in Russian history, not to mention by far not exceptional
cases of Russian serf-owners' sadism towards own "possessions", such as
notorious Saltychikha. So, what was, in this case, surprising in the fact
that Russia was not ready to enter one of the first industrial age major wars
which she lost despite all efforts and heroism of her military leaders and
Russian soldiers and sailors, all of who were former Russian peasants? In one
of the most important pieces of Russian classic literature, Goncharov's Oblomov, main character of
the novel, a lazy day-dreaming landowner has his life changed when dealing with
his childhood friend Stoltz who represents new capitalist forces arising in
Russia. Stoltz, being a good friend of Oblomov and who honestly tries to shake
him from the state now known in Russia as Oblomovshina, inadvertently causes
Oblomov a great pain with Oblomov dying in the end—an unchanged man, a
personification of 19th Century Russia. Even when the serfdom was abolished
in 1861, the year American Civil War started—a first fully genuine modern war
of the industrial age, which also saw many Russians fighting on the Union's
side with, in the end, Russian officer Ivan Vasilievich Turchaninov
(Ivan Basil Turchin) becoming one of the key figures in the process which led
to Emancipation Proclamation. Needless to say, Turchaninov (Turchin) was
also a veteran of the Crimean War. Interesting...
To Be Continued….
No comments:
Post a Comment