The attitude of American/ British observers to the Russian Revolution 1917

дипломные работы, история

Объем работы: 73 стр.

Год сдачи: 2008

Стоимость: Договорная

 
Introduction…………………………………………………………….3
Chapter I: The Russian Revolution 1917………………………………8
1.1. The presentation of the question………………………………...8
1.2. The Background of the Revolution 1917………………………..9
1.3. Social relations in Russia 1917 through the eyes of American/ British observers………………………………………………………16
Chapter II: American/ British observers about the level of life in Russia 1917…………………………………………………………………. 25
2.1. The level of life in Russia 1917 through the eyes of American/ British observers: economic causes of the Russian Revolution………25
2.2. The Wages and cost of living before and during the revolution…29
2.3. The cultural life 1917…………………………………………….36
Chapter III: The attitude of American/ British observers to the Russian revolutionaries………………………………………………………...38
3.1. Lenin through the eyes of American/ British observers………….38
3.2. The attitude towards the Bolsheviks…………………………… 43
Chapter IV: A choice of a political positions by the Russian intelligency in the autumn of 1917 from the point of view of Russian and American/ British historians………………………………………………………52
4.1. The attitude of American/ British observers to Russian intelligency 1917…………………………………………………………………...52
4.2. Historiographical situation……………………………………….58
Conclusion…………………………………………………………….66
Bibliography…………………………………………………………..68

The theme of this research is “The attitude of American/ British observers to the Russian Revolution 1917”. We try to reveal this question considering the Background of the Revolution 1917, social relations in Russia 1917, the level of life in Russia 1917 through the eyes of American/ British observers and the attitude of American/ British observers to the Russian revolutionaries and intelligency. It is not a simple task because of subjective views of American/ British historians in this question who are apart from the socio-cultural context of Russia.
For the English-speaking authors there are some difficulties in writing Russian history. It is understandable that the attempt to write a history of Russia, since October revolution of 1917 is reckless, and the one who indulgently conce
s to this attempt may be will forgive also lacks admitted at its realisation. A history of Soviet Russia written by the Englishman or by American, who didn’t know Marx’s philosophy thoroughly, who wasn’t from Russian, seems especially risky undertaking. But it is justified by necessity to fill in a wide and obvious blank. The books about Weste
or Central Europe written in Great Britain and the United States, frequently are spoilt by involuntary reliance of their authors that it is possible to understand politics and institutes, for example, of France, Italy, or Germany by analogy to Great Britain or America. To measure Russia, Lenin, Trozki and Stalin by parameters taken at England or at America nobody will decide to do. Before the historian writing about Soviet Russia, at each stage of his work there will be a double task arising before each serious historian: to combine figurative conceptions about ideas and purposes dramatise personal with clear appraisal of general value that has taken place.
In this research it’s important for us to describe not only the chronicle of revolutionary events (many authors have already made it), but the history of the political, social and...

E. Carr noted in his work: “Lenin spoke about the idea of Karl Marx about "permanent" or "continuous" revolution: " To try to put an artificial Chinese wall between that and the another, to separate them from each other, except of preparation of proletariat and a degree of unit it with the rural pour, is the greatest distortion of Marxism … "
This analysis was not at all scholastic. In it the difficulties of Social revolution were reflected, which, looking back on the scheme of Marxism, tried to fill in the empty place of bourgeois democracy and of bourgeois capitalism” [1].
In this research we tried to realise the way of revealing by American/ British observers the myth of proletarian October which is the myth of the triumph of the alienated and dehumanised masses over all their sufferings and deprivations. In this historically logical process, suffering is the criteria of authentic humanity. This was as true for Marx as it was for Dostoevsky. And since intense crisis makes suffering most acute, the war and the social collapse of 1917 conferred on the humiliated and offended of Russian life quintessential human status. For the suffering of 1917 was no myth, but a most cruel, physical and mental fact. In these circumstances, the modest Russian proletariat could indeed appear in the eyes of its self-appointed leaders, and in the eyes of many socialists throughout the world, to be the universal class and the bearer of the logic of history. Thus this myth became a mighty empirical force, the indispensable launching pad of the whole Soviet dream.
The processes taking place in the consciousness of the masses are not unrelated and independent. No matter how the idealists and the eclectics rage, consciousness is nevertheless determined by conditions.
We tried to follow the way of describing of American/ British observers of the historic conditions which formed Russia, her economy, her classes, her State, in the action upon her of other states, they tried to find...