All-Russian Congress of Soviets of Workers' and Soldiers' Deputies. All-Russian Congress of Soviets of Workers' and Soldiers' Deputies One of two or ordinary bourgeois government

Name the politician who delivered this speech. What political force (party) did he represent? What year is this performance from?

Read the passage from the historical source and briefly answer questions 20–22. The answers assume the use of information from the source, as well as the application of historical knowledge in the course of the history of the corresponding period.

From a politician's speech

“One of two things: either the usual bourgeois government - and then the peasant, workers, soldiers and other Soviets are not needed, then they will either be dispersed by those generals, counter-revolutionary generals who hold the army in their hands, not paying any attention to the oratory of Minister Kerensky, or they will die an inglorious death...

We are told, as the speaker and other speakers said, that the first Provisional Government was bad! And then, when the Bolsheviks ... said: "no support, no confidence in this government," how many accusations of "anarchism" were then poured on us! ... And what about the coalition government with near-socialist ministers, how does it differ from the previous one? ...It's already been a month since the coalition government was formed on May 6th. Look at the deeds, look at the devastation that exists in Russia and in all the countries involved in the imperialist war. What explains the collapse?

Predation of the capitalists. That's where the real anarchy is...

If you want to refer to revolutionary democracy, then distinguish this concept from reformist democracy under a capitalist ministry ... Now, a number of countries are on the verge of destruction, and those practical measures that are allegedly so complex that it is difficult to introduce them that they need to be specially developed , as the previous speaker said ... - these measures are quite clear. He said that there is no political party in Russia that would express its readiness to take power entirely upon itself. I answer: “Yes! Not a single party can refuse this, and our party does not refuse this: every minute it is ready to take power in its entirety.

The imperialist war continues.

In Russia there is no such group, no class that could resist the power of the Soviets...

But as long as the capitalist class in the government is represented by the majority, ... the war will remain imperialist.”

How does the speaker characterize the current government?

What are the two main consequences of the existing government he calls?

Explanation.

1) The speaker characterizes it as a bourgeois government.

2) The following main consequences of the activities of the existing government can be given:

Continued plunder of national property;

Saving ruin;

Continuation of the imperialist war.

Answers may differ from those suggested.

Involving historical knowledge, name at least three reasons for the revolution, during which the government discussed by the speaker came to power.

Explanation.

The following reasons for the revolution of 1917 can be given:

The inability of the tsarist government to achieve success in the war and normalize the work of the rear, the deterioration of the material situation of the population during the war;

Unresolved basic social issues in the empire: agrarian and labor;

Exacerbation of the national question.

Other reasons may be cited.

Explanation.

The correct answer must contain the following elements:

1) politician - V. I. Lenin;

2) political force (party) - Bolsheviks, RSDLP(b);

But the third room was locked. It seemed to Misha another oddity of Victoria, but he did not attach any importance to this. The guy also did not find the laptop, apparently, he was in a locked room.

In the end, Misha gave up, trudged into the living room, took the first book that came across and reluctantly began to study the events of the first All-Russian Congress of Soviets ...

Petrograd. June 3, 1917 Opening of the First All-Russian Congress of Soviets of Workers' and Soldiers' Deputies.

The Congress was attended by 1,090 delegates representing 305 United Soviets of Workers', Soldiers' and Peasants' Deputies, 53 regional, provincial and district associations of Soviets, 21 active army organizations, 5 fleet organizations, and 8 rear military organizations. Only 777 delegates declared their party membership, among them there were 285 Socialist-Revolutionaries, 248 Mensheviks, a total of 105 Bolsheviks, 32 Menshevik-Internationalists, 10 Menshevik-Unionists, another 24 delegates belonged to other factions and groups.

It was the second day of the convention. On the agenda was a discussion of the attitude towards the interim government. Almost everyone gathered in a beautiful spacious white hall: there were only a few minutes left before the start, and people were making noise, discussing something. Everyone was dressed up: the entire composition of the interim government had chic suits, the women had dresses or bright blouses. Koba chose not to stand out - he settled on a white jacket. It so happened that he was sitting next to Ilyich himself, on whose black jacket a red bow was neatly attached: apparently, Krupskaya was trying. On the other side of Koba sat Rykov, Sverdlov, Uritsky and a couple of intelligent Social Democrats. Most of the hall, of course, was swarming with Mensheviks and Socialist-Revolutionaries. And so the meeting began.

Irakli Georgievich Tsereteli, a Menshevik, with a special pronounced importance, in an expensive tuxedo, looked like Napoleon, got up from his seat, approached the tribune importantly: he was preparing to deliver his victorious great speech ...

As if he did not burst from his pomposity. And all because of a post in the ministry ... - as if "by the way," Ilyich Kobe said. He nodded briefly, prepared a notebook in order to write down some quotes from Tsereteli's next speech:

- ... I will say frankly, comrades, that at the present moment, when we are pursuing our international policy for world peace, we are calling for it to be backed up by military operations on our front, we are directing all our forces to organize the country's food supply, we are exerting all our forces in order to get new financial sources of income for the state - if at this moment the disintegration of the state begins, all over Russia begins in different parts what happened recently in Kronstadt, that is, the refusal to recognize a single revolutionary authority, declaring itself an arbitrary supreme organization, if this begins, and if the government cannot cope with this, then it must postpone all bills and measures in the field of politics, for it must consider that if it does not cope with these difficulties, then all the rest will be swept away by civil war and the collapse of the revolution ... We know that at the moment in Russia there is a stubborn fierce struggle for power. At the moment, there is no political party in Russia that would say: give power into our hands, leave, we will take your place ...

There is no such party in Russia...

There is such a party!

This phrase sounded like a bolt from the blue. Everyone in the room turned around. The lulled Socialist-Revolutionary-Menshevik audience woke up and buzzed. The delegates stood up, trying to see the one who challenged the hosts. Frightened leaders fussed about in the presidium. Koba, who had been writing down some of Tsereteli's phrases in fragments and was already nodding off, shuddered. The phrase belonged to the one sitting to his right. Koba glanced at Lenin in shock, but, as if coming to his senses, quickly writing down this cherished quote in a notebook, directed an attentive look at the leader of the Mensheviks.

Tsereteli fell silent for a moment, turned pale, embarrassed, nevertheless lost his solemn tone, and with a tremor in his voice wanted to finish his "great speech":

On the right they say: let the left take power, and then the country, and we will make the appropriate choice...

But of course, no one was listening to him, and Ilyich was already purposefully walking to the podium. Koba exchanged a meaningful look with Kamenev and Zinoviev, who were sitting a little way off. The Bolshevik delegates perked up, although, according to representatives of other parties, this was an absolutely crazy act with such a small number of Leninists ...

Comrades, in the short period of time that is given to me, I will be able to dwell, and I think it is more expedient, only on the main questions of principle put forward by the Rapporteur of the Executive Committee and the following speakers. The first and fundamental question that confronted us was the question of where we are present - what are those Soviets that have just gathered at the All-Russian Congress, what is that revolutionary democracy, about which there is so much talk about here in order to obscure its complete misunderstanding and complete renunciation of it. For talking about revolutionary democracy before the All-Russian Congress of Soviets and obscuring the nature of this institution, its class composition, its role in the revolution, not saying a word about it and at the same time claiming the title of democrats is strange. We are drawn up with a program of a bourgeois parliamentary republic, which has been all over Western Europe, we are drawn up with a program of reforms now recognized by all bourgeois governments, including our own, and at the same time we are told about revolutionary democracy... The Soviets are an institution that cannot be does not exist in the usual type of bourgeois-parliamentary state, and cannot exist side by side with a bourgeois government. This is the new, more democratic type of state which we have called in our Party resolutions a peasant-proletarian democratic republic in which the Soviets of Workers' and Soldiers' Deputies would have the sole power. It is in vain to think that this is a theoretical question, in vain they try to present the matter as if it could be circumvented, in vain they say that institutions of one kind or another now exist together precisely with the Soviets of Workers' and Soldiers' Deputies. Yes, they exist together. But this is precisely what generates an unheard-of amount of misunderstandings, conflicts and frictions. It is precisely this that causes the transition of the Russian revolution from its first upsurge, from its first movement forward to its stagnation and to those steps backward that we now see in our coalition government, in all domestic and foreign policy, in connection with the impending imperialist offensive.

One of two things: either the usual bourgeois government - and then the peasant, workers', soldiers' and other Soviets are not needed, then they will either be dispersed by those generals, counter-revolutionary generals who hold the army in their hands, not paying any attention to the oratory of Minister Kerensky, or they die an inglorious death. There is no other way for these institutions, which can neither go backwards nor stand still, but can only exist by moving forward. This is the type of state that was not invented by the Russians, that was put forward by the revolution, because otherwise the revolution cannot win. Friction is inevitable in the depths of the All-Russian Council, the struggle of parties for power ...

Now a number of countries are on the eve of destruction, and those practical measures that are allegedly so complicated that they are difficult to introduce, that they need to be specially developed, as the previous speaker, Citizen Minister of Posts and Telegraphs, said, these measures are quite clear. He said that there is no political party in Russia that would express its readiness to take power entirely upon itself. I answer: “Yes! Not a single party can refuse this, and our party does not refuse this: at any moment it is ready to take full power.

Publication title: All-Russian Congress of Soviets of Workers' and Soldiers' Deputies
Newspaper:
The date: 14.06.1917.
Issue number: .
Page(s): 2
not specified.
Thematic block: World War I.
Subject: Cause, military events, stages and results of the Civil War.
Rubric as indicated in the source: .
Publication type: Report.
Persons: , .
Toponyms: , .
Keywords: , .

Publication text

All-Russian Congress of Soviets of Workers and Soldiers. deputies.

June 4 meeting.

Speech by N. I. Lenin.

The first question that now stands, in the opinion of the speaker, is the question of what are the soviets that have just gathered at the congress, and what is that revolutionary democracy about which so much is shouted here.

Is there a country in Europe where anything like these councils exists? There is no such country, because one of the two: either the bourgeois government with the plans that have just been drawn, or those revolutionary institutions, of which the Congress is the representative, and which have examples in the history of the greatest upsurge of the revolution in 1792 and 1871. in France, and in 1905 in Russia.

Either we now have the usual .. bourgeois government, and then the peasants. workers', soldiers' and other councils are not needed, or the revolution will sit and all power will pass to these institutions. In the bowels of the council of the river. and s. e. a struggle of parties for power is inevitable, but this struggle will be a political experience, and not a presentation of reports that ministers make.

The speaker dwells on the reproaches of the Bolsheviks for anarchism for their attacks on the first Ver. The government proves that the present government is no different from the past. Practical measures are needed in the fight against devastation.

The Citizen-Minister of Posts and Telegraphs, says the speaker, declared that there is no political party in Russia that would agree to take full power for itself. I answer: "Yes." No party can refuse this, and our party does not refuse it. Every minute she is ready to take power entirely. (Atshilodmeny and laughter) .i

Further, I. I. Lenin gives a "popular explanation of the resolution" adopted at the Bolshevik conference on April 29. In regard to the economic crisis here, there is a demand for the immediate publication of all those unheard-of profits that the capitalists are taking on military supplies. L - a measure - the arrest of fifty or a hundred big millionaires, with the simple purpose of making the threads, fraudulent tricks, dirt, self-interest, which exist even under the new Government, be opened.

The war, in the speaker's opinion, remains imperialist, although the socialist masters do not want it. But the capitalists remain masters of the situation. To undermine all the threads of their intrigues. the biggest capitalists must be arrested. Without this, all phrases about peace "without annexations and indemnities" are empty words.

The Russian republic should not oppress any people, - say N. I. Lenin __. We want a single indivisible Russian republic, with firm power, but firm power is given by consent.

The transfer of power to the revolutionary proletariat with the support of the poorest peasantry, - N. I. Lenin slurs his speech, - is the transition to the revolutionary struggle for peace in the most secure, most painless forms, the transition to the fact that power and victory for the revolutionary workers will be both -zpechepa in Russia and around the world.

About Finland and Ukraine.

Then we are told that we are against annexations, but the War Minister Kerensky is oppressing Finland and the Ukraine. I say this is not true. And best of all, those who fought against us should know this - when we defended the federal republic.

We do not change our principles like gloves, we do not hide behind the new principles of democracy, but we say that we do not consider ourselves entitled to decree independence before the Constituent Assembly. We think that this is beyond our competence, but we do not have a crowd to do this.

About brotherhood.

We offer one more means - fraternization. I ask you: who will we help with this? And why does this fraternization fit so strangely with the line that the German headquarters is following?

You are talking about an ideological struggle. But if ideas are exchanged for a crust of bread and penknives, then this struggle is not worth much.

We have staked the fate of the whole country, of the whole revolution, and we cannot afford the luxury of being naive^

On June 20, 1914, we alone of all socialists voted against credits. We are not waging an imperialistic war, but we will not let you bring us to chaos, from which, like a phoenix from the ashes, a dictator will emerge, but not I, whom you are aiming for.

We do not want a dictatorship. Need to prove. that we are strength, but powerlessness, will, and not a broken herd of weak people.

The army must be ready at any hour to prove its might. All congress” and the committees stand on this point of view. And when people who sacrifice their lives for it say this, that's real support.

But there are those who are weak in spirit. They cover their cowardice with your words. This is not my opinion, but the opinion of the entire front.

When one soldier refused to go on the offensive, and I said that he had no place further on the front, he asked me to show mercy and leave him in the regiment. When I asked who defends fraternization, no. one was not found.

Not as a minister, I came to you, but as a comrade, to share my worries with you, to tell you what I have done and what I think to do. And you judge me!

RIVER LUN A CHAR SKA GO.

The speaker sticks with the objections of Comrade. Kerensky regarding the definition of Lepin's methods by the latter.

Further, Comrade Lunacharsky puts forward the following proposition: the fate of the whole world depends on whether your revolution develops with all its fiery energy.

Proceeding from this position, Comrade Lunacharsky considers it necessary to come out not only with criticism of the Government's measures, but also with specific instructions regarding the organization of power.

SPEECH m. and. SKOBELEV.
M. I. Skobelev, who replaces Lunacharsky, declares that he has come only to report to his comrades. And not for the sake of controversy, but only for greater ease of expressing his own thoughts, he will operate with some of the arguments of his opponents.

Fight for peace.

Comrade Skobelev devotes the end of his speech to a government note calling for a conference. Under the favorable conditions indicated in the sweat, one should understand the readiness not only of Russian revolutionary democracy, but also of the democracy of the allied countries. The question of life and death of the Russian revolution, the question of the liquidation of the war, has been put on the agenda.

The French and English democracies are also interested in these questions, and they must take part in their resolution.

When, instead of these complex methods of action, simplified surgical methods are proposed, we answer that we cannot stand anything from such criticism for our activity, because we basically reject it.

Maybe we did little in a month, “maybe we personally. and not at the height of tasks, but we do not close our eyes to the fact that Russian democracy is not up to par in the sense of organization.

View the issue in which the publication is posted

The PDF version was created in the Laboratory of Historical and Political Informatics of Perm State National Research University on the basis of the original stored in the Perm Regional Museum within the framework of the Russian Humanitarian Foundation project No. 14-11-59003

SPEECH ABOUT THE ATTITUDE TO THE INTERIM GOVERNMENT

The first and fundamental question that confronted us was the question of where we are present - what are those Soviets that have now gathered at the All-Russian Congress, what is that revolutionary democracy, about which there is so much talk about here in order to obscure its complete misunderstanding and complete renunciation of it. For talking about revolutionary democracy before the All-Russian Congress of Soviets and obscuring the nature of this institution, its class composition, its role in the revolution, not saying a word about it and at the same time claiming the title of democrats is strange. We are presented with a program of a bourgeois parliamentary republic, which has been all over Western Europe, we are presented with a program of reforms now recognized by all bourgeois governments, including ours, and we are being told at the same time about revolutionary democracy. To whom are they speaking? before the Soviets. And I ask you, is there such a country in Europe, bourgeois, democratic, republican, where something similar to these Soviets would exist? You must answer no.

As the previous speaker, Citizen Minister of Posts and Telegraphs, said, there is no political party in Russia that would express its readiness to take full power upon itself. I answer: “Yes! Not a single party can refuse this, and our party does not refuse this: at any moment it is ready to take full power.
(Applause, laughter.)

You can laugh as much as you like, but if the Citizen Minister puts us in front of this question next to the right party, he will receive a proper answer. No party can refuse this. And as long as there is freedom, as long as there are threats of arrest and deportation to Siberia - threats from the counter-revolutionaries, with whom our almost socialist ministers are collegial, as long as this is only a threat, at such a moment every party says: trust us, and we we will give you our program.

Our program in relation to the economic crisis is to immediately - for this no delays are needed - to demand the publication of all those unheard-of profits, reaching 500-800 percent, which the capitalists take, not like capitalists on the free market, in "pure" capitalism , but for military supplies. This is indeed where workers' control is necessary and possible. This is the measure which you, if you call yourself a "revolutionary" democracy, must carry out in the name of the Soviet, and which can be carried out from today to tomorrow. This is not socialism. This is opening the eyes of the people to that real anarchy and that real game with imperialism, the game with the property of the people, with hundreds of thousands of lives that will perish tomorrow because we continue to stifle Greece.

Publish the profits of the capitalists, arrest the 50 or 100 biggest millionaires. It is enough to keep them for several weeks, at least on the same preferential terms on which Nikolai Romanov is kept, with the simple goal of making them open the threads, fraudulent tricks, dirt, self-interest, which, even under the new government, cost our country thousands and millions every day. That is the main cause of anarchy and ruin, that is why we say: we have everything as of old, the coalition ministry has not changed anything, it has added only a bunch of declarations, pompous statements. No matter how sincere people may be, no matter how sincerely they wish good to the working people, the matter has not changed - the same class remained in power. The current policy is not a democratic one.

When we take power into our own hands, then we will curb the capitalists and then it will not be the kind of war that is being waged now - because the war is determined by which class is waging it, and not by what is written in pieces of paper. Anything can be written on paper. But as long as the capitalist class in the government is represented by the majority, no matter what you write, no matter how eloquent you may be, no matter what composition of almost socialist ministers you have, the war remains imperialist. Everyone knows and everyone sees it.

The offensive is now a continuation of the imperialist slaughter and the death of hundreds of thousands, millions of people - objectively, regardless of the will or consciousness of this or that minister, due to the strangulation of Persia and other weak peoples. The transfer of power to the revolutionary proletariat, with the support of the poorest peasantry, is a transition to the revolutionary struggle for peace in the most prosperous, in the most painless forms that humanity knows, a transition to the fact that power and victory for the revolutionary workers will be ensured both in Russia and in everything the world.
(Applause from part of the congregation)

Estates and classes.

The entire urban and rural population was divided "according to the difference in the rights of the state" into four main categories: nobility, clergy, urban and rural inhabitants.

The nobility remained a privileged class. It was shared on personal and hereditary.

Right to personal nobility, which was not hereditary, were received by representatives of various classes, who are in the public service and have the lowest rank in the Table of Ranks. Serving the Fatherland, one could receive hereditary, i.e., inherited, nobility. To do this, it was necessary to receive a certain rank or order. The emperor could be awarded by hereditary nobility and for successful entrepreneurial or other activities.

city dwellers- hereditary honorary citizens, merchants, philistines, artisans.

Rural inhabitants, Cossacks and other people engaged in agriculture.

The formation of a bourgeois society was going on in the country with two of its 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, the increase in the cultural demands of the population lead in 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, were part of self-governing rural societies - communities. Several rural communities made up the volost.

The members of the community were bound mutual responsibility in paying taxes and performing 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 parish 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 the norms of laws, but also guided by customs. Often, these courts punished peasants for such offenses as wasteful spending of money, drunkenness, and even witchcraft. In addition, the peasants were subjected to certain punishments that had long been abolished for other classes. For example, volost courts had the right to sentence members of their class under the age of 60 to flogging.

Russian peasants revered their elders, considering them as bearers of experience and traditions. This attitude also extended to the emperor, served as a source of monarchism, faith in the “tsar-priest” - an intercessor, guardian of truth and justice.

Russian peasants professed Orthodoxy. Unusually harsh natural conditions and the hard work associated with them - 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. The presence of one horse was considered a sign of poverty. There were about 29% of such farms. At the same time, from 5 to 25% of the owners had up to ten horses. They bought up large land holdings, hired laborers and expanded their economy.

a sharp increase in the need for money. The peasants had to pay redemption payments and a poll tax, have funds for zemstvo and worldly dues, for rent payments for land and for repayment of bank loans. There was an involvement of the majority of peasant farms in market relations. The main item 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 villagers and was rightly called by contemporaries "hungry exports."

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 peasantry to survive in the event of a famine. Allotments were distributed among the community members striped rather than being reduced to one place. Each member of the community had a small allotment (band) in different places. In a dry year, a plot located in a lowland could give a quite tolerable harvest; in rainy years, a plot on a hill helped out.

There were peasants who were committed to the traditions of their fathers and grandfathers, the community with its collectivism and security, and there were also “new” peasants who wanted to manage on their own at their own peril and risk. Many peasants went to work in the cities. The prolonged isolation of men from the family, from village life and rural work led to an increase in the 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 XX century. was to turn the peasants - the main part of the country's population - into politically mature citizens who respect both their own and other people's rights and are capable of actively participating in public life.

Nobility.

After the peasant reforms In 1861, the stratification of the nobility proceeded rapidly due to the active influx into the privileged class of people from other segments of the population.

Gradually, the most privileged class also lost its economic advantages. After the peasant reform of 1861, the area of land owned by the nobility decreased by an average of 0.68 million acres per year. The number of landowners among the nobles was declining. At the same time, almost half of the landowners considered the estates to be small. In the post-reform period, most of the landlords continued to apply semi-serf forms of farming and went bankrupt.

Simultaneously part of the nobles was widely involved in entrepreneurial activities: in railway construction, industry, banking and insurance. Funds for doing business were received from the redemption under the reform of 1861, from the lease of land and on bail. Some nobles became owners of large industrial enterprises, took prominent positions in companies, became owners of shares and real estate. A significant part of the nobles joined the ranks of the owners of small commercial and industrial establishments. Many acquired the professions of doctors, lawyers, became writers, artists, artists. At the same time, part of the nobles went bankrupt, replenishing the lower strata of society.

Thus, the decline of the landlord economy accelerated the stratification of the nobility and weakened the influence of the landowners in the state. In the second half of the XIX century. there was a loss of a dominant position in the life of Russian society by the nobles: 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 growth of the bourgeoisie. Continuing to officially be listed as nobles, merchants, petty bourgeois, peasants, representatives of this class played an increasing role in the life of the country. Since the time of the "railway fever" of the 60-70s. the bourgeoisie was actively replenished at the expense of officials. Entering the boards of private banks and industrial enterprises, officials provided a link between state power and private production. They helped industrialists get lucrative orders and concessions.

The period of the formation of the Russian bourgeoisie coincided in time with the vigorous activity of the Narodniks within the country and with the growth of the revolutionary struggle of the Western European proletariat. Therefore, the bourgeoisie in Russia looked at autocratic power as its protector from revolutionary uprisings.

And although the interests of the bourgeoisie were often infringed upon by the state, they did not dare to take active steps against the autocracy.

Some of the founders of well-known 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 one. Sons were often sent abroad to study commercial and industrial practice.

Many representatives of this new generation of the bourgeoisie sought to support scientists, representatives of the creative intelligentsia, invested 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. Mammoths.

Proletariat.

Another 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 was factory, mining and railway workers - the industrial proletariat. His education went along with the industrial revolution. By the mid 90s. 19th century about 10 million people were employed in the sphere of wage labor, of which 1.5 million were industrial workers.

The working class of Russia had a number of features:

He was closely associated with the peasantry. A significant part of the factories and plants were located in the villages, and the industrial proletariat itself was constantly replenished with people from the village. The hired factory worker was, as a rule, a proletarian in the first generation and maintained close ties with the village.
Representatives became workers of different nationalities.
In Russia, there was a significant increase concentration proletariat in large enterprises than in other countries.

The life of the workers.

In the factory barracks (dormitories), they settled not in the workshops, but in the provinces and counties from which they came. At the head of workers from one locality was a master who recruited them to the enterprise. Workers hardly got used to city conditions. Separation from their native places often led to a drop in morale, drunkenness. The workers worked long hours and, in order to send money home, huddled in damp and dark rooms and ate poorly.

The speeches of the workers for the improvement of their situation in the 80-90s. became more numerous, sometimes they took sharp forms, accompanied by violence against the factory authorities, the destruction of factory premises and clashes with the police and even with the troops. The largest was the strike 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 own" manufacturers: increasing fines, lowering prices, forced payment of wages in goods from the factory shop, etc.

Clergy.

Church ministers - the clergy - constituted a special estate, divided into black and white clergy. The black clergy - the monks - assumed special obligations, including leaving the "world". The monks lived in numerous monasteries.

The white clergy lived in the "world", their main task was the implementation of worship and religious preaching. From the end of the 17th century the order was established according to which the place of the deceased priest was inherited, as a rule, by his son or other 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, the rural priests, who made up the vast majority of it, eked out a miserable existence, as they were fed by their own labor and at the expense of parishioners, who themselves often barely made ends meet. In addition, as a rule, they were burdened by large families.

The Orthodox Church had its own educational institutions. At the end of the XIX century. in Russia there were 4 theological academies, in which about a thousand people studied, and 58 seminaries, which trained up to 19 thousand future clergy.

Intelligentsia.

At the end of the XIX century. out of more than 125 million inhabitants of Russia, 870 thousand could be attributed to the intelligentsia. There were 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 country.

In the first half of the XIX century. the ranks of the intelligentsia were replenished mainly at the expense of the nobility.

Part of the intelligentsia was never able to find a practical application of their knowledge. Neither industry, nor zemstvos, nor other institutions could provide employment for many university graduates whose families were experiencing financial difficulties. Getting a higher education was not a guarantee of an increase in living standards, and hence social status. This created a mood of protest.

But in addition to material remuneration for their work, the main 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 marginal lands. For their service, the Cossacks received land from the government. Therefore, the Cossack is both a warrior and a peasant.

At the end of the XIX century. there were 11 Cossack troops

In the villages and settlements 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. The communal ownership of the stanitsa lands was consolidated, of which each Cossack received a share in the amount of 30 acres. The rest of the land was a military reserve. It was intended mainly to create new stanitsa sections as the Cossack population grew. In public use were forests, pastures, reservoirs.

Conclusion:

In the second half of the XIX century. there was a breakdown of estate partitions and the formation of new groups of society along economic, class lines. Representatives of the merchant class, successful peasant entrepreneurs, and the nobility are also joining the new business class - the bourgeoisie. The class of hired workers - the proletariat - is replenished primarily at the expense of the peasants, but the tradesman, the son of the village priest and even the "noble gentleman" were not uncommon in this environment. There is a significant democratization of the intelligentsia, even the clergy are losing their former isolation. And only the Cossacks to a greater extent remain committed to their former way of life.