This is a post on Russia’s political history. It probably won’t be interesting to a lot of you, but I was inspired to write this up by some comments left the other day regarding Putin. My apologies to my readers who come here looking for info on Korea :-) Before I begin this post, I want to provide a little bit of my personal background in this area so you’ll know where I’m coming from. When I was in college, I double majored in Russian (language and culture) and international politics (with a focus on US-Russian relations). I earned my degree in 2001, and since then I’ve simply been a dilettante when it comes to studying these topics. I am by no means an expert. I am also not a sociologist. I’ve never taken any classes in sociology, so all of my ideas pertaining to group behavior which I’ll present here are simply based on my personal observations on the ways people behave.
The first thing you need to know about my little theory is that I’m a believer in cyclical history. As they say in Battlestar Galactica’ religious philosophy, all of this has happened before, all of this will happen again. From examining my own life and the patterns (both good and bad) which continue repeating themselves, to examining historical patterns – in which humanity doesn’t seem to learn from it’s mistakes – it appears obvious to me that there are patterns of behavior visible throughout history. It would also seem to make sense that people from one culture would follow patterns of behavior different from people of another culture. (In other words, just because the USA follows one set of political behavioral patterns, it doesn’t follow that all other countries in the world should easily adhere to the same patterns. This would be one reason why Bush’s ideas for turning Iraq into a Middle Eastern bastion of democracy didn’t fly quite like the administration thought it would.)
In 2000, while studying Russian politics and history (in Russia, actually), I began to notice patterns which really stuck in my mind – to the point that I decided to write my senior honors thesis on it the following year. Don’t worry, I won’t subject you to the entire thing; it makes for quite dull reading. Instead, let me give you an interesting timeline to muse on:
• Approximately 1040AD – The Medieval monarch Iaroslav the Wise of Kievan Rus (the early Russian state) implements a written code of laws dealing with retribution for murder, accidental death or injury, reimbursement and repayment of debts, recovery of stolen property, etc, in an unbiased legal fashion. This code of laws applied only to free males (although free males did exist in all strata of society) but nonetheless it was remarkably advanced for its time.
• The Boyar Duma and veche traditions begin. The Boyar Duma was a council of nobles, which was created to advise the prince in all matters. The veche was a public gathering of free citizens from all strata of society which gathered regularly to voice their opinions. While the princes weren’t required to consult with the veche like they were the Duma, they often did nontheless.
At this point in time, Kievan Rus was the most liberal state in Medieval Europe. Then something happened in 1223AD to totally squash liberal democratic political movements: the Mongols invaded. Dictatorship of princes who kowtowed to the Mongols began, and these dictators (erm, Tsars) retained their power after the Mongols had finally been kicked to the curb. (I should point out that the Kievan province of Novgorod was able to maintain independence from the Mongol rule by negotiating a tribute system. This enabled even greater political advances in Novgorod than had happened in Kievan Rus: the Duma and veche dismissed the prince and elected their own leaders. This lasted until the late 15th century when Ivan III sent troops from Moscow to utterly crush Novgorod and bring the province under the mantle of Moscow.)
Until the 19th century, there was nothing remotely democratic to be found within Russia. The 19th century saw the following:
• The Decembrist Revolt of 1825 – Russian Army officers refused to acknowledge the legitimacy of the new Tsar and tried to bring about a revolt to topple the Tsardom and replace it with a constitution. It failed miserably. The top leaders were publicly hanged and the others were exiled to Siberia.
• 1855 – Tsar Alexander II takes the throne. He allowed a relaxation in restrictions enabling various interest groups to form throughout Russia. These groups enabled people of all strata to organize around various political/social issues.
• 1861- Tsar Alexander II emancipates the serfs
• 1864 – Tsar Alexander II passes the Zemstvo Statute. This created a system of local councils, or zemstva, the members of which were elected directly by nobles and middle class townsmen, and indirectly by the peasantry (former serfs). This was the first time that all classes of Russian society had any say in Imperial Russian government. In 1864, the Tsar also established an independent court system modeled on western styles of jurisprudence.
• Near the end of his reign, Alexander II was seriously considering implementing an elected body akin to a parliament, whose role would be to advise the Tsar. This was still under consideration at the time of his death.
• 1881 – Alexander II was assassinated.
The new Tsar, Alexander III was wholly uninterested in reforms, the development of representative government, or in anything else which might erode his power. While he didn’t dismantle any of the reforms put in place by his father, he prevented further reforms and strengthened the autocracy.
In 1894, Alexander III died and Nicholas II assumed the throne. He held the same autocratic views as his father, although he didn’t have the same strength necessary to quell reformers.
The first thing you need to know about my little theory is that I’m a believer in cyclical history. As they say in Battlestar Galactica’ religious philosophy, all of this has happened before, all of this will happen again. From examining my own life and the patterns (both good and bad) which continue repeating themselves, to examining historical patterns – in which humanity doesn’t seem to learn from it’s mistakes – it appears obvious to me that there are patterns of behavior visible throughout history. It would also seem to make sense that people from one culture would follow patterns of behavior different from people of another culture. (In other words, just because the USA follows one set of political behavioral patterns, it doesn’t follow that all other countries in the world should easily adhere to the same patterns. This would be one reason why Bush’s ideas for turning Iraq into a Middle Eastern bastion of democracy didn’t fly quite like the administration thought it would.)
In 2000, while studying Russian politics and history (in Russia, actually), I began to notice patterns which really stuck in my mind – to the point that I decided to write my senior honors thesis on it the following year. Don’t worry, I won’t subject you to the entire thing; it makes for quite dull reading. Instead, let me give you an interesting timeline to muse on:
• Approximately 1040AD – The Medieval monarch Iaroslav the Wise of Kievan Rus (the early Russian state) implements a written code of laws dealing with retribution for murder, accidental death or injury, reimbursement and repayment of debts, recovery of stolen property, etc, in an unbiased legal fashion. This code of laws applied only to free males (although free males did exist in all strata of society) but nonetheless it was remarkably advanced for its time.
• The Boyar Duma and veche traditions begin. The Boyar Duma was a council of nobles, which was created to advise the prince in all matters. The veche was a public gathering of free citizens from all strata of society which gathered regularly to voice their opinions. While the princes weren’t required to consult with the veche like they were the Duma, they often did nontheless.
At this point in time, Kievan Rus was the most liberal state in Medieval Europe. Then something happened in 1223AD to totally squash liberal democratic political movements: the Mongols invaded. Dictatorship of princes who kowtowed to the Mongols began, and these dictators (erm, Tsars) retained their power after the Mongols had finally been kicked to the curb. (I should point out that the Kievan province of Novgorod was able to maintain independence from the Mongol rule by negotiating a tribute system. This enabled even greater political advances in Novgorod than had happened in Kievan Rus: the Duma and veche dismissed the prince and elected their own leaders. This lasted until the late 15th century when Ivan III sent troops from Moscow to utterly crush Novgorod and bring the province under the mantle of Moscow.)
Until the 19th century, there was nothing remotely democratic to be found within Russia. The 19th century saw the following:
• The Decembrist Revolt of 1825 – Russian Army officers refused to acknowledge the legitimacy of the new Tsar and tried to bring about a revolt to topple the Tsardom and replace it with a constitution. It failed miserably. The top leaders were publicly hanged and the others were exiled to Siberia.
• 1855 – Tsar Alexander II takes the throne. He allowed a relaxation in restrictions enabling various interest groups to form throughout Russia. These groups enabled people of all strata to organize around various political/social issues.
• 1861- Tsar Alexander II emancipates the serfs
• 1864 – Tsar Alexander II passes the Zemstvo Statute. This created a system of local councils, or zemstva, the members of which were elected directly by nobles and middle class townsmen, and indirectly by the peasantry (former serfs). This was the first time that all classes of Russian society had any say in Imperial Russian government. In 1864, the Tsar also established an independent court system modeled on western styles of jurisprudence.
• Near the end of his reign, Alexander II was seriously considering implementing an elected body akin to a parliament, whose role would be to advise the Tsar. This was still under consideration at the time of his death.
• 1881 – Alexander II was assassinated.
The new Tsar, Alexander III was wholly uninterested in reforms, the development of representative government, or in anything else which might erode his power. While he didn’t dismantle any of the reforms put in place by his father, he prevented further reforms and strengthened the autocracy.
In 1894, Alexander III died and Nicholas II assumed the throne. He held the same autocratic views as his father, although he didn’t have the same strength necessary to quell reformers.
Under Nicholas II, the following happened:
• 1904 – the National Congress of Zemstva was held. They gave Nicholas II a document demanding individual rights, civil equality, freedom of the press and of assembly, and the development of a legislative system. The Tsar essentially told them to take a hike.
• December 1904-January 1905 – A peaceful strike led by leaders of a newly created union was fired upon by Imperial troops. Reports ranged from 96 dead to several thousand dead, depending on the source. No one really knows for sure.
• October 1905 - St. Petersburg Council (Soviet) of Workers was formed as a representative of the working classes, in an attempt to increase their rights. The Soviet gained so much support, that Nicholas II realized he had to concede somewhat to their demands in order to retain his throne. He signed the October Manifesto, which granted various individual freedoms and created a Duma (parliament).
• 1906 – The first Duma elections were held. The make-up of the first parliament was so liberal that Nicholas II dissolved it and called for new elections. The second Duma was elected… and was even more liberal than the first. Nicholas II dissolved it as well.
• 1907 – Nicholas II changed the property qualifications for voting – meaning that only the nobles could vote for Duma representatives – leading to the election of a very conservative and weak third Duma.
• March 1917 – fed up with Nicholas II and his lack of willingness to allow reforms, the masses finally rise up and revolt. A provisional government was formed, which intended to create a democratic state.
This seemed pretty promising… but a democratic government can’t pop into place over night. Given the needs of the masses and the weaknesses in the infrastructure the provisional government inherited, the masses were not content, despite the regime change. The inability to placate the masses led to continued revolution…
• October 1917 – the Bolsheviks (under Lenin) led a revolt against the provisional government, leading to three years of civil war, culminating in the establishment of the Soviet Union.
• 1927 – Stalin takes control. Political participation was forcibly limited to state-sponsored activities.
Certainly there were acts of opposition to the Soviet government during the decades of its regime, but they were not organized democratic participatory acts. At least not until Gorbachev arrived.
• 1985 – Gorbachev becomes General Secretary of the Soviet Union. Policies of glastnost and perestroika were implemented. Glastnost was the making known to the masses of everything that had been kept from public knowledge throughout the existence of the Soviet Union. Perestroika was as a restructuring of the Soviet system, in order to establish a democratic and self-governing system. Censorship was relaxed, organizations were allowed to form, and people began discussing their political situation.
• In the late 1980s, elections which seemed quite democratic were held… the Soviet Union seemed to be slowly turning into a democracy. But, things were moving slowly and the masses didn’t want to wait.
• 1991 – Boris Yeltsin leads a coup, effectively ending the Soviet Union. Yeltsin becomes president of the Russian Federation.
At this point in time, everyone in the west hailed this as a great victory for democracy and capitalism, and seemed to believe that from here on out Russia would be a booming capitalist democracy much like the US. People seem so damn surprised that it’s not. Well, seriously. Look at Russia’s history. Look at how Russia’s people will be content for decades – even centuries – under a repressive regime, only rising up and revolting when things finally become intolerable. Most of the time the masses are apathetic. Take a look at how nearly ALL of the democratic reforms that have occurred over there through the ages were implemented AT THE TOP, when an enlightened leader (Iaroslav, Alexander II, Gorbachev) felt that the country needed more political participation/reforms. Notice how when government leaders try to slowly implement reforms in a nice, logical manner, this leads to either revolt from below of quashing from above. Russia is the most stable under strong, authoritarian leaders. Why is the current situation in Russia a surprise to anyone?
Here’s a bit of an anecdotal story about the apathy of the Russian masses, and how they differ in political behavior from your average American citizen. Under the Soviet Union, a centralized system was created to provide hot water to the masses. Most Russians still get their hot water from central hot water sources. This means that for most of the year, your average Russian has unlimited hot water. Unfortunately, for a few weeks to a month or so every summer, the hot water is shut off for routine maintenance. That’s a few weeks to a month or so of no hot water. (And let me tell you, cold tap water in Russia – even in the summer – is REALLY cold.) Now, obviously in the US the government doesn’t supply us with hot water… but just imagine for a moment that it did. Imagine for a moment how the populace would react if every summer there was a month or so of no hot water. People would be writing/calling/emailing/visiting everyone from their local city council to their state and national representatives, lobbying to get this situation remedied ASAP. You know what the Russians do when the hot water goes out? They simply deal with it.
• 1904 – the National Congress of Zemstva was held. They gave Nicholas II a document demanding individual rights, civil equality, freedom of the press and of assembly, and the development of a legislative system. The Tsar essentially told them to take a hike.
• December 1904-January 1905 – A peaceful strike led by leaders of a newly created union was fired upon by Imperial troops. Reports ranged from 96 dead to several thousand dead, depending on the source. No one really knows for sure.
• October 1905 - St. Petersburg Council (Soviet) of Workers was formed as a representative of the working classes, in an attempt to increase their rights. The Soviet gained so much support, that Nicholas II realized he had to concede somewhat to their demands in order to retain his throne. He signed the October Manifesto, which granted various individual freedoms and created a Duma (parliament).
• 1906 – The first Duma elections were held. The make-up of the first parliament was so liberal that Nicholas II dissolved it and called for new elections. The second Duma was elected… and was even more liberal than the first. Nicholas II dissolved it as well.
• 1907 – Nicholas II changed the property qualifications for voting – meaning that only the nobles could vote for Duma representatives – leading to the election of a very conservative and weak third Duma.
• March 1917 – fed up with Nicholas II and his lack of willingness to allow reforms, the masses finally rise up and revolt. A provisional government was formed, which intended to create a democratic state.
This seemed pretty promising… but a democratic government can’t pop into place over night. Given the needs of the masses and the weaknesses in the infrastructure the provisional government inherited, the masses were not content, despite the regime change. The inability to placate the masses led to continued revolution…
• October 1917 – the Bolsheviks (under Lenin) led a revolt against the provisional government, leading to three years of civil war, culminating in the establishment of the Soviet Union.
• 1927 – Stalin takes control. Political participation was forcibly limited to state-sponsored activities.
Certainly there were acts of opposition to the Soviet government during the decades of its regime, but they were not organized democratic participatory acts. At least not until Gorbachev arrived.
• 1985 – Gorbachev becomes General Secretary of the Soviet Union. Policies of glastnost and perestroika were implemented. Glastnost was the making known to the masses of everything that had been kept from public knowledge throughout the existence of the Soviet Union. Perestroika was as a restructuring of the Soviet system, in order to establish a democratic and self-governing system. Censorship was relaxed, organizations were allowed to form, and people began discussing their political situation.
• In the late 1980s, elections which seemed quite democratic were held… the Soviet Union seemed to be slowly turning into a democracy. But, things were moving slowly and the masses didn’t want to wait.
• 1991 – Boris Yeltsin leads a coup, effectively ending the Soviet Union. Yeltsin becomes president of the Russian Federation.
At this point in time, everyone in the west hailed this as a great victory for democracy and capitalism, and seemed to believe that from here on out Russia would be a booming capitalist democracy much like the US. People seem so damn surprised that it’s not. Well, seriously. Look at Russia’s history. Look at how Russia’s people will be content for decades – even centuries – under a repressive regime, only rising up and revolting when things finally become intolerable. Most of the time the masses are apathetic. Take a look at how nearly ALL of the democratic reforms that have occurred over there through the ages were implemented AT THE TOP, when an enlightened leader (Iaroslav, Alexander II, Gorbachev) felt that the country needed more political participation/reforms. Notice how when government leaders try to slowly implement reforms in a nice, logical manner, this leads to either revolt from below of quashing from above. Russia is the most stable under strong, authoritarian leaders. Why is the current situation in Russia a surprise to anyone?
Here’s a bit of an anecdotal story about the apathy of the Russian masses, and how they differ in political behavior from your average American citizen. Under the Soviet Union, a centralized system was created to provide hot water to the masses. Most Russians still get their hot water from central hot water sources. This means that for most of the year, your average Russian has unlimited hot water. Unfortunately, for a few weeks to a month or so every summer, the hot water is shut off for routine maintenance. That’s a few weeks to a month or so of no hot water. (And let me tell you, cold tap water in Russia – even in the summer – is REALLY cold.) Now, obviously in the US the government doesn’t supply us with hot water… but just imagine for a moment that it did. Imagine for a moment how the populace would react if every summer there was a month or so of no hot water. People would be writing/calling/emailing/visiting everyone from their local city council to their state and national representatives, lobbying to get this situation remedied ASAP. You know what the Russians do when the hot water goes out? They simply deal with it.
7 comments:
uh...I guess your welcome for the inspiration. Or, is it the other way around?
BTW, if anyone is interested, and I know this is last minute, but a group of Korean bloggers are getting together tomorrow to say goodbye to Gdog of "Daily Kimchi" blog fame.
Here are the details taken from I'm A Seoul Man's blog (http://seoul-man.blogspot.com/): "Tomorrow's get-together for drinks is confirmed. Sunday 22nd July 2007, Starting at 2pm.
I don't know how long it will last, but I don't have anything else to do tomorrow so it could go on till late evening.
I had a wander round yesterday and the "Western Bar", "Odyssey" (I'm not sure which part is the name and which is the description) looks like a suitable venue.
It's right outside Yeouido Subway (line 5) station Exit number 5. It's on the second floor above Dunkin Donuts.
So far confirmed are Gdog of The Daily Kimchi, Daeguowl of Kimchi for Breakfast, Stafford of The Chosun Bimbo, Aaron of Idiot's Collective, Joe of ZenKimchi and GI of Guano Island
If anyone else reading this would like to join us, please come along, the more the merrier."
Jane,
Although I believe that history tends to repeat itself, I in no way believe that history or people are cyclical in nature. While regions are more prone to different swings back and forth, I believe that many people simply search for similarities in the past to justify circumstances in the present. This is simply a cop out to me or a way to brush off contemporary realities instead of facing them in the present. This seems to be a real problem for many apathetic societies which find themselves in unfortunate circumstances. While I enjoy read many analysis' similar to the one which you wrote, I also believe that most are full of shit. Of course, this could be because I have turned into a bitter cynical historian who believes that most attempts to construct a structural syntheses upon a vary unstructured reality is simply bullshit. This is not a jab at you. Your analysis is actually pretty good. Hope that all is well.
Christopher
John - Alas, I'm totally in the wrong city.
Chris - One thing I hated about political "science" theory was that it was always written looking back and explaining what happened - it was never used to predict what would happen. Hell, my advisor wouldn't even let me use my thesis (of which the above post is a summary) to predict that Putin would become more autocratic. I do still think that cultural behavior patterns can provide a good predictor to future behaviors of said cultures... but that's just me :-)
Hi Jane,
I was also in the wrong city, but I decided to kill two birds with one stone. I took my first KTX excursion into Seoul and met some pretty nice bloggers, I got to see Seoul on a pleasant Sunday without all the traffic. It was very nice and warm, but I don't think I could take the onslaught of people during a normal rush hour. Even for a Sunday, the Metro/subway was rather full.
Sorry to read about your trip not working out, but have you thought about taking a "gap year." (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gap_Year)
Man, my whole future is like one ginormous Gap Year :-)
Have you seen this? It's from New Zealand, and even they are a little worried about the new/old Russia
http://www.tv3.co.nz/VideoBrowseAll/InternationalVideo/tabid/313/articleID/31541/Default.aspx?articleID=31541#video
Critics decry ‘Putin’s Young Army’
Thousands of young Russians are being taught survival techniques and fed propaganda at summer camps across the country.
Critics call them "Putin's Young Army" and warn they are a return to the country's old communist ways.
While I hadn't seen that particular video, I've certainly heard both pro and con arguments pertaining to Nashi (Наши), Putin's pro-Kremlin youth movement. I had a couple of students who were involved with Nashi, who claimed that it was a very positive patriotic organization. Of course, many people disagree.
I remember a huge Nashi protest fairly recently (last year or so) in Moscow in support of Putin. They interviewed a lot of the kids who said they didn't know anything about the politics, they'd just signed up for the free trip to Moscow.
Russia definitely seems to have a huge complex about the west. They think about us a LOT more than we think about them. They feel like they were defeated in the the cold war and somehow the west is to blame for everything that's gone wrong since the Soviet Union collapsed. Meanwhile, the average Westerner doesn't give the Russkies a thought any more - they just don't realize it.
Post a Comment