Disputes on the Marxist Understanding of Russian History: On One of the Theoretical Prerequisites for Creating the Soviet Union

IF 0.1 4区 哲学 Q4 Arts and Humanities RUSSIAN STUDIES IN PHILOSOPHY Pub Date : 2022-09-03 DOI:10.1080/10611967.2022.2144679
Andrei A. Teslia
{"title":"Disputes on the Marxist Understanding of Russian History: On One of the Theoretical Prerequisites for Creating the Soviet Union","authors":"Andrei A. Teslia","doi":"10.1080/10611967.2022.2144679","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Russian Marxism was fairly late to address building its own understandings of the Russian historical process. Moreover, the Bolsheviks did not have their own historiography of “Russian history” despite the fact that, beginning in 1918, they began more and more vehemently claiming not just total ideological control but also intellectual hegemony. A confrontation between “Marxist” and “non-Marxist” understandings arose. At the same time, the real disputes within the camp of Marxist historians came down to a confrontation between the versions of the historical process proposed by Georgi V. Plekhanov and Mikhail N. Pokrovskii back in the 1910s. This article broadly analyzes the disputes in the Marxist camp, from pressing political implications such as attitudes toward the state to the definition of the place of “historical facts” in theory and interpretation. We also demonstrate that it was, in fact, the understandings of Plekhanov, Leon D. Trotsky, and Pokrovskii that continue, both explicitly and implicitly, the legacy of Vasily O. Klyuchevsky’s historical schema and his understanding of the “state school,” a legacy that has remained unstudied until now.","PeriodicalId":42094,"journal":{"name":"RUSSIAN STUDIES IN PHILOSOPHY","volume":"60 1","pages":"418 - 426"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"RUSSIAN STUDIES IN PHILOSOPHY","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10611967.2022.2144679","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ABSTRACT Russian Marxism was fairly late to address building its own understandings of the Russian historical process. Moreover, the Bolsheviks did not have their own historiography of “Russian history” despite the fact that, beginning in 1918, they began more and more vehemently claiming not just total ideological control but also intellectual hegemony. A confrontation between “Marxist” and “non-Marxist” understandings arose. At the same time, the real disputes within the camp of Marxist historians came down to a confrontation between the versions of the historical process proposed by Georgi V. Plekhanov and Mikhail N. Pokrovskii back in the 1910s. This article broadly analyzes the disputes in the Marxist camp, from pressing political implications such as attitudes toward the state to the definition of the place of “historical facts” in theory and interpretation. We also demonstrate that it was, in fact, the understandings of Plekhanov, Leon D. Trotsky, and Pokrovskii that continue, both explicitly and implicitly, the legacy of Vasily O. Klyuchevsky’s historical schema and his understanding of the “state school,” a legacy that has remained unstudied until now.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
马克思主义对俄国历史认识之争——论苏联成立的理论前提之一
摘要俄罗斯马克思主义在建立自己对俄罗斯历史进程的理解方面已经相当晚了。此外,布尔什维克并没有自己的“俄罗斯历史”史学,尽管从1918年开始,他们开始越来越强烈地宣称不仅是完全的意识形态控制,而且是知识霸权。出现了“马克思主义”和“非马克思主义”理解之间的对抗。与此同时,马克思主义历史学家阵营中的真正争议归结为格奥尔基·V·普列汉诺夫和米哈伊尔·波克罗夫斯基在1910年代提出的历史过程版本之间的对抗。本文广泛分析了马克思主义阵营中的争议,从对国家的态度等紧迫的政治含义到“历史事实”在理论和解释中的位置定义。我们还证明,事实上,正是对普列汉诺夫、列昂·D·托洛茨基和波克罗夫斯基的理解,明确和隐含地延续了瓦西里·O·克柳切夫斯基的历史图式和他对“国家学派”的理解,这一遗产至今仍未得到研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
14
期刊介绍: Russian Studies in Philosophy publishes thematic issues featuring selected scholarly papers from conferences and joint research projects as well as from the leading Russian-language journals in philosophy. Thematic coverage ranges over significant theoretical topics as well as topics in the history of philosophy, both European and Russian, including issues focused on institutions, schools, and figures such as Bakhtin, Fedorov, Leontev, Losev, Rozanov, Solovev, and Zinovev.
期刊最新文献
Concluding Russian Studies in Philosophy: An Eye Towards the Future The Concept of Perfection in Lev Karsavin’s Religious Metaphysics Variants of Images of the Future in the Work of Lev P. Karsavin Lev Karsavin: Russian Religiosity and Russian Revolution The Metaphysical Path: Lev P. Karsavin’s Philosophical Experience
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1