THE AGRARIAN FOES OF BOLSHEVISM STUDIES OF THE RUSSIAN INSTITUTE COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY The Agrarian Foes of Bolshevism PROMISE AND DEFAULT OF THE RUSSIAN SOCIALIST REVOLUTIONARIES FEBRUARY TO OCTOBER By Oliver H. Radkey COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY PRESS NEW YORK 1958 THE system of transliteration from the Russian employed in this book is based on that of the Library of Congress with certain modifications. Familiar names of German or Jewish origin are given in the German form (Rosenblum, Richter), whereas less familiar ones or names the original form of which is doubtful, are transliterated from the Russian (Gendelman, Shreider); in a few instances names are simply given in the form most familiar to the author. The soft and medial hard signs and the two dots over stressed e, pronounced yo in Russian, have been confined to Russian text or titles and do not appear in the case of proper names in the English text or in the citation of authors, the only exceptions being names of some significance that are frequently mispronounced (Slerov, Pugachev). Dates are given in the Old Style. COPYRIGHT @ 1958 COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY PRESS, NEW YORK PUBLISHED IN GREAT BRITAIN, CANADA, INDIA, AND PAKISTAN BY THE OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS LONDON, TORONTO, BOMBAY, AND KARACHI Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 57-12340 MANUFACTURED IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA THE RUSSIAN INSTITUTE OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY THE Russian Institute was established by Columbia University in 1946 to serve two major objectives: the training of a limited number of well-qualified Americans for scholarly and professional careers in the field of Russian studies, and the development of research in the social sciences and the humanities as they relate to Russia and the Soviet Union. The research program of the Russian Institute is con ducted through the efforts of its faculty members, of scholars invited to participate as Senior Fellows in its program, and of candidates for the Certificate of the Institute and for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Some of the results of the research program are pre sented in the Studies of the Russian Institute of Columbia University. The faculty of the Institute, without necessarily agreeing with the conclusions reached in the Studies, believe that their publication advances the difficult task of promoting systematic research on Russia and the Soviet Union and public understanding of the prob lems involved. The faculty of the Russian Institute are grateful to the Rockefeller Foundation for the financial assistance which it has given to the program of research and publication. STUDIES OF THE RUSSIAN INSTITUTE COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY SOVIET NATIONAL INCOME AND PRODUCT IN I937 Abram Bergson THROUGH THE GLASS OF SOVIET LITERATURE: VIEWS OF RUSSIAN SOCIETY edited by Ernest J. Simmons THE PROLETARIAN EPISODE IN RUSSIAN LITERATURE, I928-I932 EdwffYd f. Brown MANAGEMENT OF THE INDUSTRIAL FIRM IN THE USSR: A STUDY IN SOVIET ECONOMIC PLANNING David Granick SOVIET POLICIES IN CHINA, I9I7-I924 Allen S. Whiting UKRAINIAN NATIONALISM, I939-I945 John A. Armstrong POLISH POSTWAR ECONOMY Thad Paul Alton LITERARY POLITICS IN THE SOVIET UKRAINE, I9I7-I934 George S. N. Luckyj THE EMERGENCE OF RUSSIAN PANSLAVISM, I856-I870 Michael Boro Petrovich BOLSHEVISM IN TURKESTAN, I9I7-I927 Alexander G. Park THE LAST YEARS OF THE GEORGIAN MONARCHY, I658-I832 David Marshall Lang LENIN ON TRADE UNIONS AND REVOLUTION, I893-I917 Thomas Taylor Hammond THE JAPANESE THRUST INTO SIBERIA, I9I8 James William Morley SOVIET MARXISM: A CRITICAL ANALYSIS Herbert Marcuse THE AGRARIAN FOES OF BOLSHEVISM: PROMISE AND DEFAULT OF THE RUSSIAN SOCIALIST REVOLUTIONARIES, MARCH TO OCTOBER, 1917 Oliver H. Radkey, Jr. TO THE MEMORY OF MY MOTHER AND FATHER Sarah Hewlett and Oliver H. Radkey FOREWORD FROM undergraduate days the author has been interested in the fate of the large but little-known movement which spoke for the peas antry in the Revolution of 1917. There was a certain mystification about the subject: Why this collapse of a movement which defended the peasant interest in one of the great peasant lands of the world? Why this beheading of a class so imposing in numbers and why its enforced servitude to a cause not its own? There was no answer to the problem, only the raw material for an answer, and this scattered in distant places and unavailable in Western tongues. All this simply added to the interest. It was apparent, even to the immature mind, that Western writers had nothing to offe r, and Russian writers seemed hopelessly prejudiced, when they dealt with the subject at all. The paradox of peasant loss in a peasant land, then so baffiing, is now quite easy to understand, but first the blank in the record had to be filled and the myth of mass rule exploded in the mind of the author. For it must be said that the triumph of a minority in Russia in 1917 was not in defiance of the nature of human society, but in accordance with it. No lesson of history is more illuminating, or appalling, than the ability of a small group hungry for power to sub jugate and victimize the mass of their fellow beings-the rural mass more easily than the urban. Always the peasantry has borne the brunt of fiscal extortion and military sacrifice, from the crushing incidence of church and state in ancient Egypt to the dictum of a Prussian king that the rural toiler is the "beast of burden of human society." The story of the feeble enterprise of the peasants' partisans in Russia and of their failure is the subject of this book. These partisans were called Populists. With the older Populism of x FOREWORD the nineteenth century this study is not concerned; others have dealt with it at greater length than it deserves. It seems incredible that a tiny band of adult children should have claimed so much attention while the broad movement of neo-Populism in our own century has been neglected. The only explanation is that under the influence of the German school of Kulturgeschichte, slavishly followed elsewhere by intellectuals who damn everything that is German, attention has been riveted upon the high-flown abstractions of a few individuals, and particularly upon the vastly overpublicized antithesis between East and West, instead of upon the conflict of social groups, national or class, Eastern or Western, out of which this vapor arises. Enough has been said in this book about the ideology of neo-Populism (we shall see how lightly it rested upon the Socialist Revolutionaries in 1917), but no time has been wasted on tracing its philosophical origins. In the last analysis, it sprang from the emotions of those who embraced it and from the mind of V. M. Chernov, who took from the older Populism and from Marxian socialism, from Western re visionism and Russian reality, from Comte, Avenarius, Mach, and others, whatever he found suitable for his purpose, throwing the rest away and adding much of his own, in a ceaseless endeavor to con struct an ideology that would be pleasing to people who practiced terrorism and loved the peasantry, yet wished to preserve it from the inequalities of a regime of private property such as had grown out of the French Revolution and might conceivably grow out of the revolution which they were fomenting in Russia. In accordance with the author's view that too much attention has been paid to the ideology of movements and too little to their prac tice, his treatment has centered on the events of 1917 and on an analysis of why these events were so little in harmony with the stated purposes of the neo-Populist movement. The emphasis throughout has been on men and their actions, their foibles and failures, rather than on the theories they threw up to justify their feelings or conceal their actions. In short, the author has set himself the task of writing a history of Social Revolutionism in 1917, sometimes in more detail than the reader will relish, for the purpose of presenting a full record of the movement whose failure forms the complement of Bolshevik
Description: