Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

9996Chekhov's world

Expand Messages
  • vkozyreff
    Jan 9, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      Dear List,

      Regarding Chekhov's society, "The ideologies promoted by the Russian
      intelligentsia tended to be socially radical, democratic, and
      cosmopolitan, although they might have a concealed elitist,
      authoritarian, or nationalist streak". (Presniakov)

      "These theories, derived from the advanced thought of contemporary
      Europe, often bore little relevance to the immediate problems
      confronting Russian society, but this seldom detracted from their
      appeal. Intellectuals were acknowledged to be their mentors by nearly
      all educated Russians, that is, by everyone not closely identified
      with the autocratic regime…Russian socialism was therefore a product
      of the intelligentsia" (Pares, Bernard. A History of Russia. New
      York: Alfred A. Knopf Inc, 1926, third edition revised. Pares)

      Before the First World War the intelligentsia's dominance began to
      wane, and they were discriminated against in the early days of the
      revolution and during the Stalinist period. However, during later
      communism, they were worshipped…

      http://econc10.bu.edu/economic_systems/NatIdentity/FSU/Russia/Westerni
      zation.html

      In support of what Michael writes, I would like to remind that
      the "Russian Revolution" was not really Russian and was a war
      declared on the Russian people. As many revolutions, it depended on
      an external (diaspora) financing.

      Below, see a reference about the causes of revolutions/civil wars in
      general, and another on Russian revolution specifically.

      In God,

      Vladimir Kozyreff

      -----
      1. Greed and grievances

      ...Rebellion may be explained by atypically severe grievances, such
      as high inequality, a lack of political rights, or ethnic and
      religious divisions in society. Alternatively, it might be explained
      by atypical opportunities for building a rebel organization.
      Opportunity may be determined by access to finance, such as the scope
      for extortion of natural resources, and for donations from a diaspora
      population.

      Opportunity may also depend upon factors such as geography: mountains
      and forests may be needed to incubate rebellion. We test these
      explanations and find that opportunity provides considerably more
      explanatory power than grievance. Economic viability appears to be
      the predominant systematic explanation of rebellion.

      The results are robust to correction for outliers, alternative
      variable definition, and variations in estimation method. Greed and
      Grievance in Civil War by Paul Collier and Anke Hoeffler

      http://www.worldbank.org/research/conflict/papers/greedandgrievance.ht
      m

      -----
      2. The Russian revolution in particular did not originate from the
      Russian people

      "The biggest fallacy concerning the Bolshevik Revolution is that it
      originated from the people ... from the poor huddled masses. In
      reality, it was financed by: a) England's Lord Alfred Milner, b) Wall
      Street bankers such as J. P. Morgan & company and the Rockefeller
      Family c) Europe's Rothschild dynasty, and d) German bankers such as
      Max Warburg, whose brother Paul was the key man in setting up
      America's Federal Reserve System.

      ...Money for the Bolshevik Revolution came from superrich Western
      financiers, some of whom were Americans! In essence, then, the very
      core of Communism was a partnership between monopoly-oriented
      Capitalists and the international Socialist movement".

      http://pub64.ezboard.com/frespectforthetencommandmentsfrm9.showMessage
      ?topicID=1.topic



      --- In orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com, michael nikitin
      <nikitinmike@y...> wrote:
      > Those that called for the Czar to be shot were
      > Communists who were enciting the people.
      >
      > Because the war caused much hardship on the people
      > some did want a change, but the change was mostly
      > from the upper class(Kerensky, etc..) and the different
      > political powers such as the Communists, Mensheviks, etc...
      > who wanted power.
      >
      > Most of the common people loved the Czar. The Serfs
      > received their freedom and were glad for it. The landowners
      > didn't particularly like the Czar.
      >
      > Much of the demonstrations were prooganda in nature and
      > were purposely done in view of the Czars travelling route.
      > This was done to discourage the Czar and facilitate his
      > abdication which the likes of M. Rodzianko and Co. did well.
      >
      > Unfortunately the Communists, with the help of bankers from
      > New York and England, had a different agenda. The rest is history.
      >
      > Michael N.
      >
      >
      > podnoss <podnoss@y...> wrote:
      > So much has been conveniently forgotten about the events from
      > February '17 to July '18.
      >
      > On February 26, 1917 there were about 300 000 people on the streets
      > of Petrograd calling for the downfall of the Tsar. Repression was
      > impossible. All the Tsar's senior generals had told him this and -
      on
      > the advice of M. Rodzianko the Speaker of the Duma - convinced him
      to
      > abdicate.
      >
      > The 250 000 soldiers of the Petrograd garrison had gone over to the
      > people's side on February 27, forcing the police in the capital to
      > flee. People called for the Tsar and the Empress to be shot. "And
      > they shouldn't spare the daughters" was a popular refrain. No armed
      > force could have put down what became a national uprising against
      the
      > monarchy. Perhaps someone such as yourself could've stepped forward
      > and warned the people that it was a sin to rise up against the Tsar.
      > If they failed to listen, what then?
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > -- In orthodox-synod@yahoogroups.com, "vkozyreff"
      > <vladimir.kozyreff@s...> wrote:
      > >
      > > They condemn the passivity, sadness, indecision,
      > complacency, "états
      > > d'âme", in which those sentimental artists and writers dwelled.
      The
      > > country was drifting to the catastrophe and needed resolute
      action
      > > and faith while facing determined communist terrorists
      >
      >
      >
      > ---------------------------------
      > Do you Yahoo!?
      > Yahoo! Hotjobs: Enter the "Signing Bonus" Sweepstakes
      >
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Show all 28 messages in this topic