Siberian regions. Western origins of Siberian regionalism

SIBERIAN REGION, 1. The system of views of a part of Sib. intelligentsia on the past, present and future of the region as specific. region (territory) as part of Ros. state-va.

2. Socio-polit. and cultures. movement that tried to propagate and implement these views. S. o. has undergone a long evolution, developing the concept of territory at different stages of its history. independence of Siberia, headed by the region. will present. body - Siberian Regional Duma, endowed with a set of powers similar to the competence of the state in the feder. USA system.

As a system of views regional. theory was actively developed by Siberians, prominent scientists, writers and societies. figures G.N. Potanin, N.M. Yadrintsev, S.S. Shashkov, M.V. Zagoskin, IN AND. vagina, A.V. Adrianov, V.M. Krutovsky, N.N. Kozmin, I.I. Serebrennikov, M.B. Shatilov and others. The exiles had a great influence on the formation of their views. Decembrists, Petrashevites, leaders of the roar. democracy of the 1850s and 60s, as well as P.A. Slovtsov And A.P. Shchapov. P.A. Slovtsov laid the tradition of the complex. exploring the region, openly opposed the corners. links, giving preference to the free people. colonization. A.P. Shchapov was the first to formulate the concept of Siberia as a special region from the standpoint of the zemstvo-regional theory, which was based on federalist ideas that were not based on nat. differences, but on the features of the settlement of Rus. people, its existence in different natural climate. conditions.

Further development of the worldview of the supporters of the movement in con. 1850s - early. 1860s associated with the study of some young Siberians in the universities of St. Petersburg, Moscow, Kazan. Exclude. a role in this regard was played by the community of Sib. students in St. Petersburg (1859–63), uniting at different times approx. 20 people ( N.S. Schukin, G.N. Potanin, N.M. Yadrintsev, N.I. Naumov, F.N. Usov, S.S. Shashkov, N.M. and E.M. Peacocks, I.V. Fedorov, I.A. Khudyakov, N.N. Pesterev, S.S. Popov and others). Initial their gatherings did not have a clear focus, but a range of issues gradually emerged, which attracted general attention and was associated with Siberia, its colonial position as part of the state, and its future.

The basis of the emerging regional. The program was the concept of Siberia as a colony and the interpretation of the process of its development (colonization) as a result of the activities of the people. masses, their max. enterprising and freedom-loving elements. According to the concept, the efforts of the people did not lead to acts. development produces. forces of the region, since their results were used by the government, turning this region into a fine. and economy. colony. The regionalists saw a way out of the current situation in the development of “worldly public enterprise”, freedoms. resettlement, "establishment of patronage of Siberian trade and industry", improving the life of workers. The ideologists of the movement opposed the corners. exile and arbitrariness of the authorities, advocated the development of education and culture, one of the first raised the question of opening a university.

In 1863, returning from Europe. Russia to Siberia, regionalists deployed to Omsk, Tomsk, Krasnoyarsk And Irkutsk active propagandist. activity. After the arrest of a number of supporters of the movement and the seizure of their manuscript in May-June 1865. proclamations "Siberian patriots" and "Patriots of Siberia" in Omsk, a special was organized. consequences. commission on the case “On the discovery of those responsible for the distribution of anti-government proclamations in Siberia”. A total of 59 people were arrested, and the total number of those involved in the inquiry reached 70. But it was not possible to establish the authors, and only Potanin's "frank confession" served as the basis for accusing the regionalists of separatism and preparing the separation of Siberia from Ros. empire. The investigation ended on Nov. 1865, but only in Feb. 1868 sentencing in absentia: G.N. Potanin received 5 years hard labor. works, most of the rest were subject to deportation to a distant place. counties of the Arkhangelsk and Vologda provinces.

After the amnesty, from the 2nd floor. 1870s, regionalists activate propagandists. activity in the newspapers created by them "Siberia", "Eastern Review", "Siberian Newspaper", publish theor. articles, organize the celebration of the 300th anniversary of the annexation of Siberia to Russia, timed to coincide with the publication of the Foundation. labor N.M. Yadrintsev "Siberia as a colony". Studying the colonization of the region, they tried to answer the question about the reasons for the serious lag in the development of Siberia in comparison with the European colonies. state-in (USA, Canada, Australia), the development of which began at about the same time and among the population of which descendants of immigrants from the metropolis predominated. The answer was to establish a negative. impact penalty. colonization and arbitrariness of visiting officials.

In economy sphere, the views of the regionalists boiled down to the fact that in Siberia there are not even the rudiments of market relations. The regionals were convinced of the possibility of moving towards a more just society. I build with the help of the community, artisans. and artel. production, and subsequently - cooperation. Within the liberal Populism, they considered it possible to implement their program through reforms (zemstvo, judicial), allowing freedom. resettlement and enlightenment. activity.

After the death of N.M. Yadrintsev in 1894, the role of the leader and ideologist of the movement passes to G.N. Potanin. The regionalists finally formed the idea of Siberia as a colony in the economy. and polit. aspects. Further development of the issue of the specifics of the region leads to the substantiation of the conclusion about the formation of a special historical and ethnogr. type of Russian, formed as a result of interaction with the natives, the process of colonization and natural climate. conditions. Based on this, the region was allocated to the department. the region, the autonomy of which "is a necessary, logical consequence of the constitutional order."

During revolutions 1905–1907 the regionalists claimed the role of supra-parties. education, expressing the interests of the entire population of Siberia. Their ideal of autonomy was embodied in the project of creating Sib. region thoughts. This idea was embodied in the “Basic Provisions of the Siberian Regional Union”, adopted at its congress on August 28–29. 1905 in Tomsk. On their basis in the region for a short time (autumn 1905) a bloc of polit. associations, which included regionalists, socialist-revolutionaries, liberals, close-knit regional. slogans.

By Feb. The 1917 movement continued to combine liberal. demands to speed up the capitalist. development of Siberia by attracting foreign. capital, discovery free port at the mouths of the Ob and Yenisei with neo-populist. illusions about the possibility of alternatives. the option of creating a "new economic system" based on cooperation. S. o. united then a relatively small group of the intelligentsia of Tomsk, Krasnoyarsk, Omsk and Irkutsk and was not popular with the main. part of the region's population.

In the period 1917–20, the regionalists occupied the extreme right flank of the petty-bourgeois. democracy, without representing a homogeneous entity and without creating a single region. associations. Dep. their groups and prominent supporters (G.N. Potanin, A.V. Adrianov, N.N. Kozmin, I.I. Serebrennikov, V.M. Krutovsky, L.I. Shumilovsky, P.V. Vologda, G.B. Patushinsky, M.B. Shatilov, I.A. Yakushev etc.) were closely related to the differences. polit. formations represented in Siberia. S. o. failed to clearly formulate its program, except for the promotion of the slogan of the autonomy of the region. Massir. repetition of autonomist provisions, holding the region. forums in 1917 (conferences and 2 congresses) became possible thanks to the support and participation in them of representatives and org-tions of various. parties and groupings (Socialist-Revolutionaries, Mensheviks, People's Socialists, Nationalists, co-operators, etc.). To the regional prominent representatives of the capital joined the associations. intelligentsia, who at that time found themselves in Siberia ( G.K. Gins, N.D. Buyanovsky, I.A. Mikhailov, G.G. Telberg etc.), and izv. Siberians ( V.N. Pepelyaev, I.A. young, M.P. Golovachev and etc.).

In tech. 1917 and up to Nov. 1918 regionalism and its slogans served as the basis for the creation of a watered in Siberia. bloc led by the Socialist-Revolutionaries, launched a struggle against the seizure of power by the Bolsheviks, for the overthrow of the owls. power, and then headed by his representatives anti-Bolshevik. state formations in the east of Russia ( West Siberian Commissariat, Temporary production of autonomous Siberia, Temporary Siberian production).

Graduate the fall of polit. influence, internal disintegration and confusion, the transition to the positions of right-wing forces and open support for Kolchak. dictatorships meant disaster for the majority of the petty-bourgeois. org-tions and groupings of the region. The first of them to con. 1918 left the watered. regional arenas. Subsequently, their slogan of autonomy in different. modifications (Zemsky Sobor, Sib. Constituent Assembly, Sib. People's Assembly, etc.) was used by the anti-communist. associations in the course of mass armaments. speeches 1920–22, including on ter. Far Eastern Republic.

Oct. 1922 in Vladivostok on the eve of the evacuation of the Whites and the occupation of the city by parts of the NRA FER, a group of regionalists ( A.V. Sazonov, IN AND. Moravsky, G.I. Chertkov, M.P. Golovachev and others) proclaimed the creation of the Sib. pr-va, which immediately emigrated to Japan, retaining the status of "government in exile" until 1925. In the 1920s–30s. in China and Czechoslovakia, where the leaders of the movement ended up (I.A. Yakushev, E.L. Zubashev, I.I. Serebrennikov, V.I. Moravsky, M.P. Golovachev), attempts were made to revive S. o. as a public-polit. a movement that has anti-Sov. and separatist tendencies. Polit. the platform of the regionalists was reflected in the newspapers and magazines published by them in Prague and Harbin "Free Siberia", "Siberian Archive", "Siberian Questions" and "Our Newspaper". Regional workers in exile developed a wide cultural, scientific and enlightenment. and publisher. activities, awakening interest in the study of the economy and history of Sib. region in a number of the largest Amer. and European scientific centers.

Throughout its history, S. o. as an alternative to centralization, it offered decentralization, which should have meant in practice the participation of regions in the national. internal federal policy. beginnings, economy federalism and national cultures. autonomy.

Lit.: Ablazhey N.N. Siberian regionalism in emigration. Novosibirsk, 2003; Shilovsky M.V. Political processes in Siberia during social cataclysms in 1917–1920. Novosibirsk, 2003; He is. Siberian regionalism in the socio-political life of the region in the second half of the 19th - the first quarter of the 20th century. Novosibirsk, 2008; Yadrintsev N.M. Siberia as a colony in geographical, ethnographic and historical terms. Novosibirsk, 2003.

N.N. Ablazhey, M.V. Shilovsky

In the early 60s of the 19th century, the Siberian regionalists believed that the problem could be solved by secession and Siberian statehood along the lines of the United States, and then granting autonomy to the region. Overcoming the colonial dependence of Siberia seemed possible through broad community entrepreneurship, stimulating free resettlement, eliminating criminal exile, “establishing patronage of Siberian trade and value,” and developing education.

In the summer of 1865, the conspiracy of the Siberian separatists was uncovered. In the Siberian Cadet Corps, a proclamation "to the patriots of Siberia" was found. A "case for the separation of Siberia from Russia and the creation of a republic like the United States" was launched, which became one of the largest political processes in Russia. 70 people were involved in the investigation, 19 of them were sentenced to prison and exile.

In 1870-90s of the 19th century, the regionalists continued to work out the program of the movement. They believed that in Siberia there were not even the beginnings of capitalist relations, and they were convinced of the possibility of stepping over to a more just progressive social system with the help of the community, handicraft, artel production, at the beginning of the 20th century - through cooperation.

In order to promote regional ideas in the 70-90s of the 19th century, their own periodicals were created - Siberia, Siberian Newspaper, Eastern Review, Siberian Collection.

In the 1880s-1890s, the regionals actively advocated the establishment of local (zemstvo) self-government in the Siberian region. At the beginning of the 20th century, the regionalists were divided into two groups: the regionalists - the Cadets and the regionalists - the Socialist-Revolutionaries. In August 1905, a congress of the Siberian Regional Union was held in Tomsk. Its main goal was to unite the main political groups in the region under regional slogans. The adopted document “Basic Provisions of the Siberian Regional Union” emphasized: “Constituting an indivisible part of Russia, participating on an equal basis with other parts of Russia in the general system of state administration on the basis of popular representation, Siberia, both in its historical, geographical, ethnographic and socio-economic conditions, and according to purely local commercial, industrial and agricultural interests, it represents a separate area. Proceeding from the position that each region should have the right to self-government, we declare that Siberia, by virtue of the indicated conditions and interests, needs the organization of regional self-government in the form of the Siberian Regional Duma, which independently solves all local needs and issues of economic, socio-economic and educational". It was proposed to transfer to the jurisdiction of the Duma:

a) local budgetary law;
b) public education;
c) public safety;
d) local means of communication and tariff;
e) public health;
f) the disposal of all the lands of the region, which are part of the endowment fund with forests, waters and subsoil;
g) drawing up the procedure for land use in connection with the resettlement issue;
h) a foreign question.

After the February Revolution of 1917, organizations of regional autonomists arose (Irkutsk, Krasnoyarsk, Tomsk, Omsk, Petrograd, Novonikolaevsk, etc.). To develop the question of the future of autonomous Siberia, as I.I. unification of the democratic forces of Siberia, that it is possible to establish the Siberian Union or the Siberian League of Societies - Autonomists. In August, a conference was held in Tomsk, which adopted a resolution "On the autonomous structure of Siberia" within the framework of a federation with self-determination of regions of nationalities. She also approved the white and green flag of Siberia.

But the regionalists, as it turned out, failed to create an independent regional association due to a clear lack of strength. In addition, the population did not support regional ideas. The regionals did not have a clearly formulated program. The only strong point of the regionalists was the idea of autonomy. And on this issue, as it turned out at the Tomsk regional congress held in October 1917, there is no unity of views, since the supporters of autonomy have split into autonomists and federalists who do not recognize Siberia as one region and advocate for its division into a number of regions.

During 1917, under the regional slogans, the Socialist-Revolutionaries, cooperators, Zemstvo, Mensheviks, the regionalists proper under the leadership of the Socialist-Revolutionaries, who led the subsequent activities related to the development and implementation of the concept of autonomy in practice, took place. The first Siberian Regional Congress in Tomsk in 1917 declared itself in principle in favor of autonomy and elected the Siberian Regional Council, which was instructed to "express the will of the people and act as power in the intervals between congresses." The extraordinary regional congress, held at the end of 1917, decided to create the Siberian Constituent Assembly on the basis of "universal, direct, equal suffrage."

The established 1st Siberian government - the Provisional Siberian Regional Council - was headed by Grigory Potanin, who by that time had become a famous Russian geographer, botanist, and traveler. The Siberian Regional Duma in Tomsk became the supreme legislative body of the "Siberian government". The Duma began work on January 20 (28), 1918. It included representatives of the party of socialists - revolutionaries, Mensheviks, regionalists, organizations of the indigenous peoples of Siberia and immigrants. The Socialist-Revolutionary I.A. Yakushev became its chairman.

But a few days later, the chairman of the Tomsk Council of Workers' and Soldiers' Deputies N.N. Yakovlev dispersed the Siberian Duma. Its activities were resumed after the uprising of the Czechoslovak Corps.

Directly in Western Siberia, under the leadership of the Social Revolutionaries, in the spring of 1918, an anti-Bolshevik revolt was prepared, which began on the night of May 26, 1918, as a result of which the so-called West Siberian Commissariat was formed.

From the moment the West Siberian Commissariat left the underground, a sharp struggle flared up around it, into which the regional workers were drawn. In June 1918, in Omsk, the Commissariat transferred power to the Council of Ministers of the Provisional Siberian Government (VSP). Very quickly, the ministers achieved the liquidation of the Provisional Government of Autonomous Siberia, which “gave birth” to them, assembled and then temporarily suspended the work of the Siberian Regional Duma. After the Ufa State Conference (September 1918), the Siberian government ceased to be Siberian and was transformed into the All-Russian Council of Ministers under the Directory, and then under A.V. Kolchak.

In all these events, the regionals took an active part, breaking up into supporters of "people's rule" and the military-bureaucratic dictatorship. With the coming to power of Kolchak, all talk about the autonomy of Siberia ceased. By mid-1919, the movement's supporters had left the political arena.

With the end of the Civil War, the history of Siberian regionalism also ends. Supporters of the movement continued their activities in exile. But then they developed the problem of Siberian autonomy taking into account the experience of Soviet construction.

It is quite difficult to assess the results of the activities of the Siberian regional workers. The years of Russian revolutions became the times of their greatest activity. Undoubtedly, the regionalists did a lot for the socio-economic and especially cultural development of Siberia. However, in the context of the revolutions of 1905-1907, 1917. and the Civil War, the separatists were not able to become a unifying force in Siberia, they could not convey their ideas to the masses, which predetermined their defeat.

Topic 28. Siberian regionalism

Introduction

The reasons for the formation of regionalism, its ideology and figures

The views of regionalists on the development of Siberia, its place in the Russian state

Conclusion

Bibliography

Introduction

Siberian regionalism is a system of views of a part of the local intelligentsia in the second half of the 19th - early 20th centuries. on the past, present and future of Siberia as a specific region (territory) within the Russian state, as well as the socio-political and cultural movement that tried to promote and put these ideas into practice. Regionalism has gone through a long evolution, developing the concept of territorial independence of Siberia, headed by the regional (regional) governing body - the Siberian Regional Duma, endowed with a set of powers similar to the competence of the state in the US federal system. However, repeated attempts by the regional activists to move to practical actions and create an appropriate all-Siberian organization were not successful. At the same time, for more than half a century this movement had a beneficial effect on the most diverse aspects of life in Siberia. Many positive changes in the economic, political, scientific and cultural life of the region that occurred in the second half of the 19th - early 20th centuries were associated with the ideas and works of N.M. Yadrintseva, G.N. Potanina, M.V. Zagoskina, S.S. Shashkov and other representatives of regionalism.

In Soviet times, the activities of the regionals were largely hushed up, they were presented as counter-revolutionaries and separatists. However, at the present stage it has become possible to objectively consider this important page in the development of the social movement in Russia and Siberia.

1. Reasons for the formation of regionalism, its ideology and figures

The leader and one of the main theoreticians of the Siberian regionalism was an outstanding traveler, geographer, ethnographer, botanist, specialist in the Eastern epos, honorary citizen of Siberia Potanin Grigory Nikolaevich (1835 - 1920). Yadrintsev Nikolai Mikhailovich (1842 - 1894) - Well-known publicist and public figure, one of the main theorists of the Siberian regionalism.

Until the 1917 revolution, the government pursued a policy of “state feudalism” in relation to Siberia, the constituent elements of which were:

Firstly, the monopoly on the land and natural resources of the region, the exploitation of which was considered the exclusive right of the state or the Cabinet of His Imperial Majesty. Siberia practically did not know private ownership of land.

Secondly, predominantly "penalty" colonization and restriction of the free people until the beginning of the twentieth century. According to N.M. Yadrintsev in the 70s. Х1Х century 4 million local residents accounted for 0.5 million convicts and exiles. The vast majority of them were those who were transported according to the sentences of rural societies “for vicious behavior”.

Thirdly, the agrarian and raw material nature of the development of the economy, which is weakly included in market relations. Non-equivalent nature of the exchange of goods. According to the data for 1884, the trade turnover of the Irbit Fair, the largest for the region, looked as follows. European goods were sold, mainly manufactories for 41,932 thousand rubles, Siberian goods (furs, leather, lard, fat, bristles, honey, wax, oil, pine nuts, etc.) for 11,836 thousand rubles and transit Chinese tea for another 7553 thousand rubles. And even at the beginning of the twentieth century. The measures of tsarism did not go beyond increasing the profitability of agriculture and the simplest processing of raw materials, the export of which until 1911 was artificially restrained by the Chelyabinsk tariff change.

Fourthly, the weak development of market relations gave rise to a specific position of the local bourgeoisie, comprador in essence, who amassed capital thanks to monopoly and bondage caused by the arbitrariness of the local administration and non-equivalent exchange (“Siberian merchant - agent of the manufacturer”).

Fifth, the arbitrariness of administrative structures formed by immigrants from European Russia, not connected with the interests of the population and considering the "Siberian service" as a way of personal enrichment. Sixth, the weak development of education, science and culture, causing a massive outflow of young people to universities in the European part of the country and hindering the formation of local intelligentsia. These circumstances were supplemented by the inequality of the population of the region in terms of civil rights in comparison with the inhabitants of the central provinces. Judicial reform extended to Siberia only in 1897, and zemstvo institutions remained the object of dreams of Siberians until 1917.

The colossal size and multinational character of the Russian Empire determined, on the one hand, the formation of the concept of domestic federalism (regionalism), and, on the other hand, gave impetus to attempts to implement it. The founder of Siberian separatism is traditionally considered the first local governor, Prince M.P. Gagarin, who was hanged in 1721 on the orders of Peter I "as a bribe-taker and ruiner of the people." In fact, "the tsar heard rumors about Gagarin's intention to become a ruler in Siberia independent of Russia." The bogey of separatism has long been a headache for the St. Petersburg authorities. In particular, in 1831, the Archbishop of Irkutsk Iriney Nesterovich, according to the words of the official Voinov, reported that the chairman of the local provincial government, the exiled Decembrist A.N. Muravyov "wants to be a Siberian prince." Rumors remained rumors, but in 1863 S.S. Popov, S.S. Shashkov and N.M. Yadrintsev, in handwritten proclamations to “Siberian Patriots” and “Patriots of Siberia”, called on Siberians to rise up in order to form a “Republic of the United Siberian States”, for which they paid with deportation to the Vologda and Arkhangelsk provinces. Thus, the beginning of Siberian regionalism was laid. Nevertheless, both the authorities and the supporters of the movement themselves denied even the potential prospect of the development of separatist sentiments in the region.

The period of formation of the ideology of the Siberian regionalism took almost fifteen years - from the beginning of the 60s to the middle of the 70s of the XIX century. Undoubtedly, the Russian experience itself became the basis of the regional theory, spontaneously awakening local patriotism among the Siberian intelligentsia, emotional perception of all kinds of manifestations of inequality in relations between the center and the outskirts. The impact on the regionalists of the populist ideas of A.I., dominant at that time in the Russian liberation movement, was significant. Herzen and N.G. Chernyshevsky, anarcho-federalist ideas of M.A. Bakunin, Zemstvo-regional theory of A.P. Shchapov, historical works of N.I. Kostomarov and even the freedom-loving poetry of T.G. Shevchenko. Among the ideological predecessors, the exiled Decembrists and Petrashevists, the first Siberian historian P.A. Slovtsova and others.

The history of the Western European colonies, political and economic theories of that time had a significant influence on the formation and evolution of the views of the regionalists. Western ideas and colonial experience to a large extent became the impetus for future regionalists to realize the colonial position of Siberia as part of the Russian Empire. Interest in Western ideas was dictated primarily by the need to provide a scientific justification for the so-called "Siberian issues". In the list of topics that interested the regionalists, of course, the colonial question was in the first place. In the 80s of the XIX century. regionalists actively promoted the achievements of Western colonial science on the pages of their printed organ - in the newspaper "Eastern Review".

The views of regionalism on the path of development of Siberia

The regionalists linked the future of Siberia inseparably with its industrial development. Only the development of its own industry will increase the value of labor and allow Siberia to throw off the "manufacturing yoke" of Moscow. Therefore, the regionalists were ready to put up with capitalism in the name of the industrial upsurge of Siberia. “So, manufactories and manufactories,” cried Yadrintsev, “if only under a capitalist economy, this is the means to raise the country.” One should not focus only on the image of the “dark sides of factory labor” and forget about its cultural significance; under its influence, a new worldview and more civilized social relations are being formed.

In Siberia, there is no need to be afraid of the bourgeoisie, it is important to involve it in the implementation of regionally significant tasks. “Her role,” added Yadrintsev, “will be to gather the people, arrange the establishment of a manufactory, and the best organization will subsequently be born in this institution, as a new need.” For the time being, it is important to combine the organizational and financial possibilities of the bourgeoisie with the needs of the people. “Strength in unity!” he proclaimed. The hour of war with the bourgeoisie in Siberia has not yet struck. In our country, bourgeois instincts are much weaker than those of Western Europe, and besides, they should benefit "young countries, being identified with the motive of enterprise." The task of the regionally minded intelligentsia for this period was to assist and point out to the bourgeoisie its cultural mission - the formation of industry. The democratic intelligentsia, together with the people in Siberia, will not allow the formation of a monetary aristocracy. After all, Siberian society, democratic in its essence, Yadrintsev explained, is like the North American States. Only when industry has been created should one set about limiting the bourgeoisie and "begin the emancipation of the urban worker."

Tariff policy should become an important tool for the development of Siberia's economic independence. Criticizing protectionism, which benefits only the mother country, the regionalists are also cautious about the principle of free trade. Siberia, which does not have its own industry, Yadrintsev believed, needs more than just protectionism, it needs "industrial patronage." Even the protectionist system of G.Ch. Cary Yadrintsev found narrow and imperfect. He demanded state guardianship from the government in the name of the economic development of Siberia. This policy should be directed, firstly, to the accelerated colonization of the region; secondly, to the development of technical education; and, thirdly, to "promoting the founding of factory industry by moral influence, through technical congresses and societies, literature, etc."

However, the Western experience, primarily America, averted the regionalists from the absolutization of many theoretical positions. They understood that any country, as a natural organism, must go through certain stages of development. Therefore, the questions raised in Siberia seem to them not only purely territorial, caused by natural and other conditions, they acquire a general historical character. Excessive decentralization must be moderated by centralized measures (this has already been done in the US), just as the development of industry brings social problems to the fore. But Siberia has not yet grown up to this, has not had time to take advantage of either the fruits of decentralization or the benefits of industry. In this regard, Yadrintsev wittily noted that every dish at the table is served in a certain sequence. Europeans and Americans have already dined and are drinking coffee, and therefore it would be unwise to offer them herring again. “It seems to me,” he remarks in a letter to Potanin, “that our industrial issue is also a herring. Do not develop your manufactories, do not eat herring, it will make you sick. “Yes, it’s good for you, dear sir, to say this when you have already eaten, but I have not yet had dinner, and I have not had a snack either.”

Yadrintsev defined the goal of his theoretical searches in the colonial question as follows: "From all the negative aspects of European colonization, I made up the positive ideal of the colony and began to look for it." He is clearly not satisfied with some trends in British colonial policy. He strongly objects to the sale of land in large plots, which will lead to the dispossession of the land of the mass of colonists and will necessarily require the creation, if not of slaves, then of laborers. Yes, and the principle of free trade, proclaimed by England, Yadrintsev believed, "in the hands of the bourgeoisie is the same as the railway and machines for the exploitation of the worker."

The study of various types of communities in Russia and in the West gave social significance to these theoretical constructions. According to Potanin, direct analogies of Siberia and the North American States are not always correct. They differ not only in relation to the connection with the metropolis, but also in the spirit itself. He saw the guarantee of the future development of Siberia in the communal, artel beginning. It was extremely important for him to point out the difference that existed between Siberian and American colonization. If in North America, Potanin argues, the land was declared the property of "the pope or the state", then the people inhabited Siberia "in a prehistoric manner." Therefore, in Siberia, a community had to be formed - after all, the land remained "free, not enslaved either to the owners or to the state."

In Central Russia, however, the community has been ravaged by serfdom; it is being destroyed by ever-increasing individualism. “It is known that the colonies,” Potanin sums up the theoretical basis for his reasoning, “always develop those principles that originated in the metropolis, but could not find a sufficiently wide application. This law is confirmed in the same North American States ... If the American States were the implementation of the best principles worked out by the science of the 18th century, then Siberia, as the newest colony, can assimilate the best advanced results of the science of the 19th century. For the regionalists, the community was represented as a cell that "decides the fate of peoples." According to Yadrintsev, "the regional issue has not lost its significance, it has acquired even more, just like the communal one, the issues of communities and cantons, as the seed of state life." This phrase directly echoes the conclusion of Alexis de Tocqueville that the community is "the basis of the foundations of the management of society." It is in it, Tocqueville believes, that the American citizen joins the government, gets used to the established order, gets a clear idea of the nature of his duties and the scope of his rights. It was from the community that the principle of federalism itself organically grew. With the help of the community, Yadrintsev believed, a whole range of problems could be solved - from colonial to social. Therefore, it is necessary not only to preserve the community from destructive individualism, but it is important to give it a new direction in development. It should, under favorable circumstances, provide the possibility of a more convenient transition to new forms of civilization. The destructive tendencies affected the Siberian community to a lesser extent than the Russian one. The community must take a step from community farming to community farming. It was Siberia, Potanin believed, that should make this transition, this is its world significance. “I don’t understand,” Potanin wrote about this, “why should we go the same way with Europe? Why can't an old brick be useful in a new building?... I think that this brick can be recommended to be inserted into an aluminum palace.” In this one can also see the influence of Proudhon with his ideas of the synthesis of community and property, the idealization of small property and the organization of free associations. “In the associative movement, as in the sea of keys, all social questions find their end: both labor, and women's, and pedagogical, and colonial.” At the same time, Potanin names another Western prophet: "Saint-Simon is the Prometheus of the future."

From the communal organization of life, the regionalists went to clarify the social and economic role of cooperation. It should be noted that the theories of cooperation were very popular at that time thanks to Chernyshevsky, Western European socialists, especially Louis Blanc. But in contrast to them, the regionalists sought to apply cooperative forms of labor organization to the cause of colonizing the outskirts. That is why they so persistently collect and study the experience of cooperation in the English colonies in Canada and New Zealand.

The intense theoretical search among the regionalists is permanently colored by a special feeling of Siberian patriotism. Figuratively characterizing the period of the Western apprenticeship of the Russian intelligentsia, Yadrintsev recalls the tale of the boy Karym, who had many teachers and was taught various sciences, but he still did not know what to do. But another teacher appeared who taught him little: love. And only then his knowledge received a practical application. Therefore, Yadrintsev opposed the oblivion of patriotism, which in the West is pushed aside by the desire for the "emancipation of labor." He was annoyed by the craze of Russian youth for this "religion of advanced Europe." With obvious displeasure, he noted that young people had become unnecessarily Europeanized and "unconditionally listen to every word of Western teachers and obey." The patriotic and national idea seems to the regionalists to be more relevant for Siberia than the "struggle against capital", because it contains part of the ideal of human development - autonomy. Hence, Potanin's enthusiastic attitude towards the national feelings of the Swiss is completely understandable: "Such a colossal patriotism in such a small society."

For the ideologists of regionalism, it was important to find a formula for combining Siberian patriotism with the universal desire for freedom and justice. But in this theoretical construction, nevertheless, it was patriotism that was the only soil on which modern ideals could be transferred. The regionalists equally opposed the unifying centralization of both the tsarist bureaucracy and the "idealist cosmopolitans" from the revolutionary and liberal camps. Louis Blanc, one of the Western apostles of the Russian socialists, they considered hopelessly outdated.

The example of the regionalists clearly shows that Russian public figures dealt with Western ideas in a very utilitarian way, and when they did not suit them completely, they did not hesitate to build their theories on top of them, applying them to Russian reality. The regional ideology was a Siberia-oriented complex fusion of Russian social messianic hopes with Western social doctrines. From the variety of Western teachings, there was a purposeful selection of only those that corresponded to the ideological expectations of the regionalists. It was also an attempt not only to accept Western ideas and experience, but also the desire to develop their own, in many respects original, teachings about the ways of development of Siberia. Potanin formulated his attitude to Western science in the following way: “It is necessary to translate from a foreign language not into a language, this is not enough, but into forms of Russian life, into forms of Russian feeling.” This is another aspect of the problem of "Russia and the West".

Practical activities and the fate of the regionals

For a short time (1863), the supporters of the movement believed that the problem could be solved by separating the Siberian statehood like the United States, and then granting autonomy to the region. Overcoming the colonial dependence of Siberia seemed possible through broad community enterprise, stimulating free resettlement, eliminating criminal exile, “establishing patronage of Siberian trade and values,” and developing education. In 1865, the proclamations “To Siberian Patriots” and “Patriots of Siberia” were confiscated from the regionals and their subsequent arrest led to the creation of a special commission of inquiry in Omsk. It was not possible to establish the authors, and only a “frank confession” served as the basis for accusing the regionalists of preparing a separation from the Russian Empire. The investigation ended in November 1865, but only in 1868 did the Senate pass a verdict in absentia.

In the 1870s-90s of the 19th century, regionalists, and above all N.M. Yadrintsev, continued to work out the program of the movement. They believed that in Siberia there were not even the beginnings of capitalist relations and were convinced of the possibility of stepping over to a more just progressive social system with the help of the community, handicraft, artel production, and at the beginning of the 20th century - through cooperation.

Within the framework of liberal populism, the ideologists of the movement intended to implement their program through reforms (the introduction of a zemstvo, a public court, freedom of resettlement) and educational activities. In parallel with this, attempts were made to substantiate the specifics of Siberia in geographical, socio-economic, ethnographic terms, allowing it to be singled out as a separate region (region) of the Russian state, and, consequently, to substantiate the right to self-government and autonomy. One of the "bricks" of the movement is the provision on the formation in Siberia of a special ethnographic type of the Russian population. At the same time, Yadrintsev expressed the idea that regionalism should be based not on an ethnographic feature, but on an economic factor. And Potanin in 1873-1876 tried to connect the concept of "region" with the development of the community in the spirit of Proudhon's theory. An example of such a gigantic community, which includes an entire region, he saw in the Ural Cossack army.

In order to promote regional ideas in the 70-90s of the 19th century, their own all-Siberian periodicals were created - Siberia, Siberian Newspaper, Vostochnoye Obozreniye, Siberian Collection. By the beginning of the 20th century, G.N. Potanin (1835-1920). Like-minded people grouped around him (A.V. Adrianov, D.M. and P.M. Golovachev, V.I. Anuchin, P.V. Vologodsky, Vl.M. Krutovsky, N.N. Kozmin, etc.). For most of the regional activists, the uncertainty of political views was characteristic. So, in the autumn of 1905, D.I. Kopylov noted that “there was no clear distinction between bourgeois liberalism and revolutionary democracy in Tobolsk province. Liberal and revolutionary-democratic elements acted jointly ... Figures of an indefinitely revolutionary type advanced into the arena of political life.

Since the end of the 19th century, the idealization of the traditional peasant way of life, the assertion that “Siberia is a paradise for peasants” (Potanin) has become characteristic of the regions. Developing this position, supporters of the neo-populist direction continued to look at capitalism as a phenomenon artificially propagated by the government. Preference was given to handicraft production and cooperation. By this time, the regionalists had finally formed an idea of Siberia as an economic and political colony. Further development of the issue of the specifics of the region led them to the conclusion that there is a special historical and ethnographic type of Russians here, formed as a result of interaction with the aboriginal population, the influence of the colonization process and natural and climatic conditions. Based on this, the region stood out as a separate region of Russia, the autonomy of which "is a necessary, logical consequence of the constitutional order." During the revolutions of 1905-1917, geographical and ethnographic motivations are relegated to the background, and the economic factor is put in the first place.

On August 28-29, 1905, a congress of the Siberian Regional Union was held in Tomsk. Its main goal was to unite the main political groups in the region under regional slogans. The adopted document “Basic Provisions of the Siberian Regional Union” emphasized: “Constituting an indivisible part of Russia, participating on an equal basis with other parts of Russia in the general system of state administration on the basis of popular representation, Siberia, both in its historical, geographical, ethnographic and socio-economic conditions, and according to purely local commercial, industrial and agricultural interests, it represents a separate area. Proceeding from the position that each region should have the right to self-government, we declare that Siberia, by virtue of the indicated conditions and interests, needs the organization of regional self-government in the form of the Siberian Regional Duma, which independently solves all local needs and issues of economic, socio-economic and educational". It was proposed to transfer to the jurisdiction of the Duma: “a) local budgetary law; b) public education; c) public safety; d) local means of communication and tariff; e) public health; f) the disposal of all the lands of the region, which are part of the endowment fund with forests, waters and subsoil; g) drawing up the procedure for land use in connection with the resettlement issue; h) a foreign question.

The movement began to claim the role of a non-class, supra-party formation, expressing the interests of the entire population of Siberia. Therefore, in August 1905 r. Potanin openly declares: "Regionalism is not a party, an alliance of parties."

For a short time (autumn 1905), a block of associations was formed in Siberia, linked to regional slogans: it fell apart after the publication of the manifesto on October 17. The attempt of the Socialist-Revolutionaries (Socialist-Revolutionaries) to continue the activities of the Siberian Regional Union on their own failed. But at the same time for an alliance with the regionalists the Cadets spoke, and in the decision of the joint meeting of the bureau - the Tomsk department of the Constitutional Democratic Party and the Siberian Regional Union - it was emphasized: "The Siberian Union can be a unifying center for all progressive parties in Siberia during the upcoming election campaign." A certain part of the Social Democrats clearly gravitated towards the regionalists.

In the inter-revolutionary period (1907 - February 1917), the efforts of the supporters of the movement focused on activities in the departments of the Society for the Study of Siberia and Improve Life. The regional authorities took advantage of the periodical press, primarily the Tomsk one: "Siberian Life" and the Krasnoyarsk magazine "Siberian notes." On the whole, by 1917, regionalism united a relatively small group of intelligentsia in Krasnoyarsk, Irkutsk and a number of other cities and was not popular in Siberia.

After the February Revolution of 1917, organizations of regional autonomists arose (Irkutsk, Krasnoyarsk, Tomsk, Omsk, Petrograd, Novonikolaevsk, etc.). In order to develop the issue of the future autonomous mustache of Siberia, I.I. wrote in the summer of 1917. Serebrennik needs to lay the foundation for a non-partisan unification of the democratic forces of Siberia, which can be carried out by the establishment of the Siberian Union or the Siberian League of Autonomist Societies.

The governors failed to realize this plan. They were clearly not strong enough to create an independent regional association. In addition, the population did not support regional ideas. The "rating" of the movement was clearly shown by the results of the elections to the Constituent Assembly in Siberia (November-December 1917). The oblasts acted as a separate list only in one Yenisei, which collected 0.7% of the vote. In the Tomsk and Irkutsk provinces, they united with the People's Socialists 123.2 thousand votes or 0.86%. The oblasts failed to clearly formulate the program. Their only strong point was the idea of autonomy. In addition, the regional congress held in October 1917 in Tomsk showed that its delegates did not have a unity of views on this issue either, since the supporters of autonomy split into autonomists and federalists, into recognizing Siberia as one region and advocating for its division into a number of areas.

At an illegal meeting of the Siberian Regional Duma in January 1918, the Provisional Government of Autonomous Siberia (VPAS) was elected, headed by the Socialist-Revolutionary P.Ya. Derber. Created for the development of anti-Soviet activities, it did nothing, and immediately after its election, the East fled. Six ministers, nominated by the regionals, remained in place - P.V. Vologodsky, "Vl.M. Krutovsky, G.B. Patushinsky, M.B. Shatilov, I. Serebrennikov, apparently did not share the VPAS program.

Directly in Western Siberia, under the leadership of the Socialist-Revolutionaries in the spring of 1918, preparations were made for an anti-Bolshevik coup. At the head of the underground stood the commissioners (commissars) of the VPAS B.D. Markov, P.Ya, Mikhailov, V.A. Sizikov, who formed the so-called West Siberian Commissariat. After the anti-Soviet rebellion that began in Novonikolaevsk on the night of May 26, 1918, power in the region passed to him. Already in their first address “To the entire population of Western Siberia” dated June 1, 1918, members of the Commissariat, in the spirit of the Socialist-Revolutionary ideas of “people’s rule”, promised to “restore the correct exchange of goods and friendly relations with the allied powers, violated by the Bolsheviks”, “convene the Siberian Constituent Assembly” and “promote the speedy resumption of the work of the All-Russian Constituent Assembly, which alone can save the country by uniting all the forces of revolutionary democracy to solve the political and social tasks put forward by the revolution.

From the moment the West Siberian Commissariat came out of the underground, a sharp struggle flared up around it, into which the regionals were drawn. Some of them, headed by Potanin and A.V. Adrianov, together with the Cadets, opposed the planting of "people's rule" in Siberia. As a result of powerful pressure from the right, on June 30, 1918 in Omsk, the Commissariat transferred power to the six ministers already mentioned above, which made up the Council of Ministers of the Provisional Siberian Government (VSP). Very quickly, they achieved the liquidation of the Provisional Government of Autonomous Siberia, which “gave birth” to them, gathered, and then temporarily suspended the work of the Siberian Regional Duma, to which they were formally accountable.

July 1918, the Provisional Siberian Government adopted the "Declaration on the State Independence of Siberia", which proclaimed that "The Provisional Siberian Government solemnly declares that it alone, together with the Siberian Regional Duma, is responsible for the fate of Siberia, proclaiming complete freedom of independent relations with foreign powers" . Further, the government promised to convene the All Siberian Constituent Assembly in the near future. In conclusion, it was declared that the VSP does not consider Siberia forever torn off from Russia and those territories "which together constitute the Russian State, and believes that all its efforts should be directed towards the reunification of the Russian statehood." After the Ufa State Conference (September 1918), this state entity ceased to be Siberian and was transformed into the All-Russian Council of Ministers under the Directory, and then under A.V. Kolchak.

In all these events, the regionals took an active part, splitting into supporters of "people's rule" and the military-bureaucratic dictatorship. With the coming to power of Kolchak, all talk about the autonomy of Siberia ceased. By mid-1919, the movement's supporters had left the political arena. Subsequently, their slogan of autonomy in various modifications (Zemsky Sobor, Siberian Constituent Assembly, Siberian People's Assembly, Siberian Peasant Soviet Republic, etc.) was used in the anti-Soviet struggle of 1920-1922.

regionalism siberia

Conclusion

With the end of the Civil War, the history of Siberian regionalism also ends. However, supporters of the movement continued their activities in exile. But now they were developing the problem of autonomy for Siberia, taking into account the experience of Soviet construction. Moreover, in all known developments, separatist ideas were categorically rejected. “We Siberians,” Okulich emphasized, “have repeatedly pointed out that we don’t think about any separation from Russia, we consider ourselves Russian people, we don’t sympathize with independence, but we definitely want to be masters in our homeland - in Siberia.”

Regionalism was brought to life on the one hand by the socio-political upsurge that swept the whole country as a result of the Great Reforms of Alexander II (1860-1870s). On the other hand, it was due to the policy of the tsarist government, which, until the revolution of 1917, pursued a policy of “state feudalism” in relation to Siberia.

The regional ideology was a Siberia-oriented complex fusion of Russian social messianic hopes with Western social doctrines.

It is quite difficult to assess the results of the activities of the Siberian regional workers. The main period of their activity is the second half of the 19th century. and early XX. The years of Russian revolutions became the time of their greatest activity. Undoubtedly, the regionalists did a lot for the socio-economic and especially cultural development of Siberia. However, in the context of the revolutions of 1905-1907, 1817. and the Civil War, they were not able to become a unifying force in Siberia, they could not convey their ideas to the masses, which predetermined their defeat.

Bibliography

1.Goryushin L. Siberian regionalists: history and modernity. // Science in Siberia. 1992. No. 40-41.

2.Zverev V.A. History of Siberia: in 3 hours. Part 2. Novosibirsk, 1999.

.Lamin V.A. Siberian region. // ECO. 1999 No. 8.

.Materials for the chronicle of the social movement in Siberia in 1895 - 1917. Tomsk, 1994. Issue. 1.

.October and the Civil War in Siberia. Story. Historiography. Source study. Tomsk, 1993.

.Sesyunina M.G. G.N. Potanin and N.M. Yadrintsev - the ideologists of Siberian regionalism (on the question of the class essence of Siberian regionalism in the second half of the 19th century). Tomsk, 1974.

.Shilovsky M.V. On the question of the colonial position of Siberia as part of the Russian state // European studies in Siberia. Tomsk, 2001. Issue. 3.

.Shilovsky M.V. Socio-political movement in Siberia in the second half of the 19th - early 20th centuries. Regionals. Novosibirsk, 1995.

.Shilovsky M.V. Siberian regionalists in the socio-political movement in the late 50s - 60s of the XIX century. Novosibirsk, 1989.

Tutoring

Need help learning a topic?

Our experts will advise or provide tutoring services on topics of interest to you.
Submit an application indicating the topic right now to find out about the possibility of obtaining a consultation.

Printed analogue: Remnev A.V. Western origins of Siberian regionalism // Russian emigration before 1917 - a laboratory of liberal and revolutionary thought. SPb., 1997. S. 142–156.

The period of formation of the ideology of the Siberian regionalism took almost fifteen years - from the beginning of the 60s to the middle of the 70s of the XIX century. During this time, the leading theorists of regionalism N. M. Yadrintsev and G. N. Potanin managed to plunge into the student movement in St. Petersburg, actively promoted their views in newspapers, magazines and open speeches in Siberia itself, and became the main figures in the famous process of "Siberian separatists" 1865 in Omsk and were deported under police supervision to the northern provinces of the European part of Russia. Along with the stormy social activity, these years also saw the search for a theoretical justification for the regional movement.

Undoubtedly, the Russian experience itself became the basis of the regional theory, spontaneously awakening local patriotism among the Siberian intelligentsia, emotional perception of all kinds of manifestations of inequality in relations between the center and the outskirts. The populist ideas of A. I. Herzen and N. G. Chernyshevsky, the anarcho-federalist ideas of M. A. Bakunin, the Zemstvo-oblast theory of A. P. Shchapov, and the historical writings of N. I. Kostomarov and even the freedom-loving poetry of T. G. Shevchenko. Among the ideological predecessors, the exiled Decembrists and Petrashevists, the first Siberian historian P. A. Slovtsov and others are also usually named. 50s - 60s of the XIX century "(Novosibirsk, 1989).

However, the analysis of journalistic articles, scientific works and epistolary heritage of the ideologues of the Siberian regionalism N. M. Yadrintsev and G. N. Potanin testifies to the significant influence on the formation and evolution of their views of the history of Western European colonies, political and economic theories of that time. Throughout his life, Yadrintsev carried his passion for the North American States and his confidence that Siberia was destined for an equally wonderful future. In 1893 he wrote to Potanin during his American trip:

“I am writing to you on July 4 - the holiday of independence: imagine my feelings ... My heart stops, and pain and longing for our homeland. My God! Will she be so blooming?

Western ideas and colonial experience to a large extent became the impetus for future regionalists to realize the colonial position of Siberia as part of the Russian Empire. G. N. Potanin directly stated at the investigation in Omsk that the idea of the separation of Siberia stemmed from an analogy with the history of North America and the Spanish American colonies. Later, he recalled the impression that the Orientalist I. N. Berezin's article on the colonies made on him, the source of which was the book of the German economist Wilhelm Roscher. From this article, Potanin "learned that there are trading and agricultural colonies, and that the history of the latter usually ends in separation from the metropolis." An article by G. G. Peizin, which Potanin also mentions in his memoirs, also interpreted Siberia as a “penal colony”. At the same time, Peizin wrote about the protest of the colonies against the exile of criminals and mentioned Franklin's brilliant pamphlet against exile. In one of the letters of 1862, Potanin exclaimed: "Now we need Jeffersons, Franklins ...".

In a letter to his colleague A.D. Shaitanov in April 1863, G. N. Potanin launched a whole program of ideological education of the regionalist:

“The revolution of minds (in Siberia) and the replenishment of the emptiness in (Siberian) heads - this is the role that lies ahead for us. Therefore, along with the study of materialism, study social doctrines and engage in reading historical and journalistic writings, study the laws of revolution and reaction and political upheavals that tend both towards the unification of nationalities and separatism, and the main thing in this reading is to equate the fate of our country with everything read. - Siberia. Then your reading will be fruitful and will turn you into a red separatist."

This explains the close interest of the founders of regionalism Yadrintsev and Potanin in Western social and economic theories. The list of Western authors whose names are abundantly scattered throughout their writings and letters is quite impressive. This is P.-J. Proudhon and Louis Blanc, A. Saint-Simon, G.-Ch. Carey, K. Marx, W. Roscher and A Leroy-Beaulieu. In the writings of D. Draper on colonization in America, they seek reinforcement for their thoughts on the impact of climate on the development of Siberia and its population.

Interest in Western ideas was dictated primarily by the need to provide a scientific justification for the so-called "Siberian issues". In the list of topics that interested the regionalists, of course, the colonial question was in the first place. Potanin wrote on May 21, 1872 to Yadrintsev:

“The question of colonial policy is the very first for me, and in it I am a complete layman and always wander not in the light of European science, but in the light of an oil lamp that smokes in my own brain.”

In the 80s of the XIX century. The regionalists actively promoted the achievements of Western colonial science on the pages of their printed organ, the Vostochnoye Obozreniye newspaper. In his book "Siberia as a colony" Yadrintsev provides a solid list of articles on the colonial issue, placed in the "Eastern Review". The newspaper also closely followed the study of the colonial question in the West, listing special European colonial journals.

In 1884, in two issues of Vostochnoye Obozreniye, under the pseudonym “Colonist”, Yadrintsev published an article “Correspondence between the colony and the metropolis”, in which, relying on Roscher’s theory, he noted a number of characteristic features that made Siberia related to the agricultural colonies of European states. In Siberia, as in America or Australia, he especially emphasized, there is no aristocracy and rigidly divided estates, everyone feels equal in rights. True, Yadrintsev admits, like the Yankees, the Siberian is rude, insufficiently educated, but he has a developed sense of his own dignity. The pursuit of profit, characteristic of all colonies, leads to the dominance of material interests, to the fact that "everyone appreciates a penny and nothing more." The reign of capital gives rise to a mass of abuses, heartlessness, immorality. But in the colonies, a person gains freedom, here society provides everyone with equal opportunities in search of happiness. The colonist who decided to leave his homeland is a remarkable person, full of energy and talents. “Indeed,” says Yadrintsev, “the peasantry in Siberia is bolder and bolder, their courage and courage are developed here even more by wandering through deserts and forests, they are very resourceful and have developed many qualities in themselves and deployed their abilities in freedom. The industrialist here is also infected with adventurism, he traveled all over Siberia, visited Kamchatka, the Kuril Islands, China, etc.” . Siberia, like America for a European, awakened in the Russian man the spirit of enterprise. He also mentions the Siberian schismatics, as if emphasizing the analogy with the English Puritans who settled in Virginia. The Siberian peasant ceases to resemble his Russian counterpart more and more. He is less infected with superstitions and prejudices, more receptive to innovations and even seeks to adopt urban fashion in clothing and everyday life. And this, does not forget to remind Yadrintsev, is a feature of all colonies. Even the “downgrading of the Russian race” due to mixing with the Siberian natives seems to him similar to the process of mestizoization in Latin America. To prove the main thesis, examples are used about criminal exile, cases of slavery, predatory mining of gold, etc. In addition to ethnographic and socio-economic features, Yadrintsev also draws attention to the methods of the colonial policy of the autocracy in relation to Siberia. Referring to the classic definition of the economic dependence of the colony on the metropolis by A. Smith, he sums up, as it were: “The main essence of the internal colonial life is based on these relations, and through them feelings, disposition and inseparability of ties are established, which are reflected in subsequent historical life” . The identification of the analogy between Siberia and European colonies is clearly necessary for the ideologue of Siberian regionalism in order to once again remind the government of the need to satisfy Siberian needs and hint at the danger of colonial separatism if the interests of their colonists are forgotten.

However, condemning the colonial policy on the merits, the regionalists could not ignore its positive impact. When G. E. Blagosvetlov suggested to S. S. Shashkov, Yadrintsev’s comrade in exile, “to scold the red-haired barbarians” (English colonizers), the latter unexpectedly stood up for them:

“Why scold? Because their colonial talents created America and Australia? Because New Holland, Cape D. Hope and Canada have been given a constitution, because they are building a university in India and plowed it with railroads? .

Being under the general impression of the ideas of material progress, they recognized that without the intervention of the mother country, the development of the colonies would have progressed extremely slowly. The point, in their opinion, is not in colonial policy in general, but in its correct organization and direction. It is no coincidence that Yadrintsev noted in one of his letters to Potanin: "When denouncing England, we must remember that its policy was still more progressive than many states, such as Spain." It is no coincidence that in 1872 Yadrintsev wrote, and then published in the journal Delo, Essays on English Colonization. In the same year, Potanin published an article in the St. Petersburg newspaper Nedelya "Where is our market for raw materials?", which contained a detailed analysis of the history of government policy towards Siberia. His conclusion is rather disappointing:

“Despite the fact that the attitude of Russia towards her colonies passed through phases analogous to those through which the history of colonial policy also passed in the West, there are, however, more grounds for believing that these analogies appeared without a definite plan to which the government would adhere, that they were the inevitable result of the course of circumstances themselves.

That is why the regionalists later reproached the government for not being able to work out some kind of clearly conscious colonial system and not skillfully using Siberia.

This also explains the complex attitude of the regionals to the planned construction of the Siberian railway, which threatened the final consolidation of Siberia as a market for raw materials. But, in their opinion, the road will undoubtedly accelerate the colonization of the region, will facilitate the import of knowledge, inventions and capital. Arguments about Yadrintsev's colonial policy completely refute the view of the regionalists only as separatists and anti-colonialists. Objecting to such coarsening of their positions, Yadrintsev explained:

“Imagine an ignorant territory isolated; it will lose more than it will gain for lack of communication. The connection between the colonies and the mother country therefore has its own meaning, and the more undeveloped the colony, the stronger the need for this connection should be. An ignorant country will starve to death, sink into stagnation, it will become Mongolia, China. - But, for mercy's sake, because the profits are too huge for this training, for bringing "part of the knowledge", these profits are worth both flesh and blood. What to do, the payment for learning is great, like the request of an unceremonious teacher, but it is better to pay dearly than to be left completely without learning and education.

In the same spirit, Yadrintsev suggested interpreting the situation of the indigenous peoples of the colonies. He urged not to be limited only to denunciation of the actions of the colonialists. “The question of limiting foreign lands, narrowing their pastures and hunting grounds,” Yadrintsev wrote to Potanin in 1872, “is an inevitable question of colonization and civilization. What to do if foreigners cannot come to terms with this. And colonization without this is unthinkable. Obviously, the conclusion suggested itself from a study of the extensive literature on the situation of the Tasmanians, American Indians and other peoples. Yadrintsev admits that there are "natural" causes of the extinction of indigenous peoples, to which he directly relates the negative consequences of the civilization of the region. In his opinion, if "a foreigner stands in these matters across the road and does not give up, the colonist is not to blame." With colonization, he believed, such negative consequences as diseases that are fatal for "foreigners", the decline of the traditional economy and even famine, "mental shocks and oppressive affects" are inevitably associated. Yadrintsev explained such obvious contradictions in his views by the fact that in the colonial question he builds "antitheses according to the Hegel-Pierre-Jacques method."

The economic aspect of the colonial issue was also difficult to resolve in the theoretical constructions of the regionalists. They inextricably linked the future of Siberia with its industrial development. Yadrintsev informs Potanin with obvious pleasure that in the person of Malthus he "found a new friend of Siberia", as he proves that Siberia suffers from its excess of raw materials. Only the development of its own industry will increase the value of labor and allow Siberia to throw off the "manufacturing yoke" of Moscow. Therefore, the regionalists were ready to put up with capitalism in the name of the industrial upsurge of Siberia. “So, manufactories and manufactories,” cried Yadrintsev, “if only under a capitalist economy, this is the means to raise the country.” One should not focus only on the image of the “dark sides of factory labor” and forget about its cultural significance; under its influence, a new worldview and more civilized social relations are being formed.

In Siberia, there is no need to be afraid of the bourgeoisie, it is important to involve it in the implementation of regionally significant tasks. “Her role,” added Yadrintsev, “will be to gather the people, arrange the establishment of a manufactory, and the best organization will subsequently be born in this institution, as a new need.” For the time being, it is important to combine the organizational and financial possibilities of the bourgeoisie with the needs of the people. “Strength in unity!” he proclaimed. The hour of war with the bourgeoisie in Siberia has not yet struck. In our country, bourgeois instincts are much weaker than those of Western Europe, and besides, they should be of benefit to "young countries, being identified with the motive of enterprise." The task of the regionally minded intelligentsia for this period was to assist and point out to the bourgeoisie its cultural mission—the formation of industry. The democratic intelligentsia, together with the people in Siberia, will not allow the formation of a monetary aristocracy. After all, Siberian society, democratic in its essence, Yadrintsev explained, is like the North American States. Only when industry has been created should one set about limiting the bourgeoisie and "begin the emancipation of the urban worker."

Tariff policy should become an important tool for the development of Siberia's economic independence. Criticizing protectionism, which benefits only the mother country, the regionalists are also cautious about the principle of free trade. Siberia, which does not have its own industry, Yadrintsev believed, needs more than just protectionism, it needs "industrial patronage." Even G. Ch. Carey Yadrintsev found the protectionist system narrow and imperfect. He demanded state guardianship from the government in the name of the economic development of Siberia. This policy should be directed, firstly, to the accelerated colonization of the region; secondly, to the development of technical education; and, thirdly, to "promoting the founding of factory industry by moral influence, through technical congresses and societies, literature, etc."

Along with the history of the colonies and colonial policy, the regionalists turn to the study of the position of the provinces in Europe, primarily in France, England and Switzerland. Yadrintsev devotes a special article to him, "The Fate of the Province and the Provincial Question in France," in which he comes to a very significant conclusion: "What a terrible example France has set with its centralized province." It was centralization that led France to defeat in the Franco-Prussian war and to revolution. Even the decentralization measures carried out in France, as Yadrintsev noted - all from the same Paris, mean only "strengthening the power of the prefects, i.e. increase in administrative tutelage over the province. Provincial reform, he concludes, "must be born out of something alive in the people and in the province itself." Following "in the footsteps of Pierre-Jacques" (Proudhon. - A.R.), Yadrintsev becomes one of the most prominent Russian advocates and theorists of decentralization. Adherence to centralism—whether autocratic or "Jacobin"—was equally distasteful to the regionalists. This was one of the serious points of their disagreement with many Russian revolutionary democrats, such as G. E. Blagosvetlov or N. V. Shelgunov. In the works of regionalists, the provincial theme rises to the height of ideological comprehension.

He calls the new colonial policy of England the policy of refined exploitation. Having given self-government to the colonies, the metropolis defends economic dependence. Another important conclusion that Yadrintsev comes to as a result of studying the evolution of the British colonial system is that there is a direct connection between the capitalist character of the industry of the mother country and its attitude towards the colonies. Only social reform in England itself, in his opinion, can lead to the final elimination of the economic exploitation of the colonies. Economic inequality is the last stage in the exploitation of the colonies, and must inevitably be followed by a general change in international relations on the basis of equality and freedom. Then, concludes Yadrintsev, "colonial policy is one of the noblest forms of mutual friendship, assistance and exchange of services among equal kindred nations between equals." In this iridescent perspective, drawn by the regionalists, one can see the clear influence of Louis Blanc.

In Central Russia, however, the community has been ravaged by serfdom; it is being destroyed by ever-increasing individualism. “It is known that the colonies,” Potanin sums up the theoretical basis for his reasoning, “always develop those principles that originated in the metropolis, but could not find a sufficiently wide application. This law is confirmed in the same North American States ... If the American States were the implementation of the best principles worked out by the science of the 18th century, then Siberia, as the newest colony, can assimilate the best advanced results of the science of the 19th century. For the regionalists, the community was represented as a cell that "decides the fate of peoples." According to Yadrintsev, "the regional issue has not lost its significance, it has acquired even more, just like the communal one, the issues of communities and cantons, as the seed of state life." This phrase directly echoes the conclusion of Alexis de Tocqueville that the community is "the basis of the foundations of the management of society." It is in it, Tocqueville believes, that the American citizen joins the government, gets used to the established order, gets a clear idea of the nature of his duties and the scope of his rights. Among the British and Americans, according to the regionalists, "the rural community breathes life and is taught by self-government to coalition and association." It was from the community that the principle of federalism itself organically grew. With the help of the community, Yadrintsev believed, a whole range of problems could be solved, from colonial to social. Therefore, it is necessary not only to preserve the community from destructive individualism, but it is important to give it a new direction in development. It should, under favorable circumstances, provide the possibility of a more convenient transition to new forms of civilization. The destructive tendencies affected the Siberian community to a lesser extent than the Russian one. The community must take a step from community farming to community farming. It was Siberia, Potanin believed, that should make this transition, this is its world significance. “I don’t understand,” Potanin wrote about this, “why should we follow the same path with Europe? Why can't an old brick be useful in a new building? ... I think that this brick can be recommended to be inserted into an aluminum palace. In this one can also see the influence of Proudhon with his ideas of the synthesis of community and property, the idealization of small property and the organization of free associations. “In the associative movement, as in the sea of keys, all social questions find their end: both labor, and women's, and pedagogical, and colonial.” At the same time, Potanin names another Western prophet: "Saint-Simon is the Prometheus of the future."

But the attitude towards the community among the regionalists was never self-sufficient (to a greater extent with Yadrintsev than with Potanin, who was clearly more passionate about populist doctrines). They always connected the communal question with regionalism. For them, this synthesis was a kind of foundation. In connection with these tasks, the role of the intelligentsia must also change radically. It should stop being cosmopolitan and be more interested in folk life. Yadrintsev reproaches the intelligentsia for groundlessness, “her dreams are vast, but in practice their activity is insignificant and unrealizable, her views are centralized, everything comes down to one plan, to one measure coming out of the center, but no one thinks to take up the education of the people, meanwhile, as soon as in this education lies the strength of institutions and the strength of reform.” Life cannot be transformed according to one plan and at once, "this requires a long preparation and perception of ideas among the masses." Only with such guides Russia "does not need to work out on its own, what Europe has come to, it will only have to take and instill the best" .

The regionalists tried to bring social, colonial and decentralization issues into one general theoretical system. Yadrintsev took credit for the fact that he managed to "bring fresh water to the colonial question," which he connected with the internal development of the metropolis and connected it with the social question. “In this way,” Yadrintsev concluded, “I brought the private colonial interest into confrontation with the general human interest, as in the case of exile, and called world progress as witnesses and judges.”36 This explains Yadrintsev’s appeal to the “decentralization primer” of Alexis de Tocqueville , federalist ideas P.-J. Proudhon, economic works of A. Smith, G.-Ch. Carey, K. Marx, D. Mill and others.

The intense theoretical search among the regionalists is permanently colored by a special feeling of Siberian patriotism. Figuratively characterizing the period of the Western apprenticeship of the Russian intelligentsia, Yadrintsev recalls the tale of the boy Karym, who had many teachers and was taught various sciences, but he still did not know what to do. But another teacher appeared who taught him little: love. And only then his knowledge received a practical application. Therefore, Yadrintsev opposed the oblivion of patriotism, which in the West is pushed aside by the desire for the "emancipation of labor." He was annoyed by the craze of Russian youth for this "religion of advanced Europe." With obvious displeasure, he noted that young people have become unnecessarily Europeanized and "unconditionally listen to every word of the teachers of the West and obey." The patriotic and national idea seems to the regionalists to be more relevant for Siberia than the "struggle against capital", because it contains part of the ideal of human development - autonomy. From this, Potanin's enthusiastic attitude to the national feelings of the Swiss is completely understandable: "Such a colossal patriotism in such a small society."

“The ideals of universal development will be accepted, they are carried in the modern air, they will also pass into the emerging nationality, but they must be given ground, it is necessary to engender a fiery patriotic love for their people.”

That is why the regionalists equally opposed the unifying centralization of both the tsarist bureaucracy and the “idealist cosmopolitans” from the revolutionary and liberal camps. Louis Blanc, one of the Western apostles of the Russian socialists, they considered hopelessly outdated. Yadrintsev’s verdict sounds categorical: “Louis Blanism died along with its creator…, the doctrine that brought in a particle of light has now become conservative and has ended its service, it has become impractical, just like its centralized state lining.” When Western social doctrines began to contradict the Siberian patriotic feeling, the regionalists did not hesitate to abandon them, introducing their own, sometimes significant, adjustments.

So, Yadrintsev complained that he constantly stumbles upon "a jamb of the cosmopolitan-social issue that has developed its own template." K. Marx argued (and “they say it’s good,” admitted Yadrintsev) that emigration from the metropolis harms it from the point of view of economic development, but this clearly contradicted the orientation of the regionalists to expand colonization. Potanin, on the other hand, offered to enter into a debate with Marx, arguing that "to keep from colonization, moreover, simply not to encourage colonization, means to create an exploitative center in one part of the globe." On the contrary, he suggests, "not only Russian central capital must make a loan to our East, but even England, if only she wants to be a humane nation of the nineteenth century." The example of the regionalists clearly shows that Russian public figures dealt with Western ideas in a very utilitarian way, and when they did not suit them completely, they did not hesitate to build their theories on top of them, applying them to Russian reality. The regional ideology was a Siberia-oriented complex fusion of Russian social messianic hopes with Western social doctrines. From the variety of Western teachings, there was a purposeful selection of only those that corresponded to the ideological expectations of the regionalists. It was also an attempt not only to accept Western ideas and experience, but also the desire to develop their own, in many respects original, teachings about the ways of development of Siberia. Potanin formulated his attitude to Western science in this way: “It is necessary to translate from a foreign language not into a language, this is not enough, but into forms of Russian life, into forms of Russian feeling.” This is another aspect of the problem of "Russia and the West".

NOTES

Cit. By: Sesyunina M. G. G.N.Potanin and N.M. Yadrintsev - the ideologists of Siberian regionalism (on the question of the class essence of Siberian regionalism in the second half of the 19th century). Tomsk, 1974, p. 93.
Berezin I.I. Metropolis and colony // Otechestvennye zapiski. 1858. Nos. 3–5.
Potanin T. N. Memories // Literary heritage of Siberia. Novosibirsk, 1983. T. 6. S. 80.
Peyzyn G. G. Historical sketch of the colonization of Siberia // Sovremennik. 1859. No. 9.
Letters of G. N. Potanin. Irkutsk, 1987. T. I. S. 58.
There. pp. 65–66.
There. S. 92.
Yadrintsev N. M. Siberia as a colony. SPb., 1982. S. 698–720.
Eastern outlook. 1884. 13 Sept. and 4 Oct.
There. 1884. 4 Oct.
There.
Letters from N.M. Yadrintsev to G.N. Potanin. Krasnoyarsk, 1918. Issue. 1. S. 24–25.
A week. 1872. Nos. 39–40.
European colonial policy and Russians in the East // Eastern Review. 1889. 20 Aug.
Letters from N. M. Yadrintsev to G. N. Potanin. S. 52.
There. S. 85.
There. S. 86.
N.M. Yadrintsev repeated the same idea on the pages of the Nedelya newspaper (Nedelya. 1873. Feb. 4).
Letters from N. M. Yadrintsev to G. N. Potanin. S. 113.
There. S. 141.
Collection of selected articles, poems and feuilletons by Nikolai Mikhailovich Yadrintsev. Krasnoyarsk, 1919, pp. 153–154.
Letters from N. M. Yadrintsev to G. N. Potanin. S. 200.
There. S. 87.
There. S. 37.
There. S. 38.
Letters of G. N. Potanin. T. 1. S. 99–100.
There. S. 97.
State archive of the Omsk region. F. 3. Op. 15. D. 18753. L. 8–9.
Letters from N. M. Yadrintsev to G. N. Potanin. S. 76.
Tocqueville A. Democracy in America. M., 1992. S. 71, 79.
Letters from N. M. Yadrintsev to G. N. Potanin. S. 120.
Letters of G. N. Potanin. T. I. C. 120.
There. Irkutsk, 1988. T. 2. S. 101.
Letters from N. M. Yadrintsev to G. N. Potanin. S. 71.
There. S. 70.
There. S. 38.
There. S. 179.
Letters of G. N. Potanin. T. 2. S. 79.
Letters from N. M. Yadrintsev to G. N. Potanin. S. 180.
There. S. 75.
There. pp. 192–193.
Letters of G. N. Potanin. T. 1. S. 150.
There. T. 2. S. 75.

support us

Your financial support goes to pay for hosting, text recognition and programmer services. In addition, this is a good signal from our audience that the work on the development of Sibirskaya Zaimka is in demand by readers.

SIBERIAN REGIONS

representatives of the public.-political. flow in the environment sib. bourgeois and petty-bourgeois intelligentsia (mid-50s of the 19th century - 1920). Regionalism originated in St. Petersburg. mug sib. students (G. N. Potanin, N. M. Yadrintsev, S. S. Shashkov, N. I. Naumov, R. N. Usov, etc.). In the 60s. S. o. stood for revolution. fight against autocracy, democratic. freedom. Upon returning to Siberia (1863), they headed and intensified the work of the Sib. circles, combining illegal and legal forms of activity. Actively spoke out in defense of "foreigners", against colonial oppression. Acting in contact with politically exiled Russians and Poles, S. o. prepared an uprising in Siberia. Viewing Siberia as a political and economic colony of Russia, and Siberians - as a new sib. "nation", individual S. o. came to erroneous conclusions about the special ways of development of Siberia, put forward reaction. the slogan of the separation of Siberia from Russia. For S.'s activity about. 70s - early 80s characterized by a fascination with populism. In the 80s - the 1st floor. 90s there was an evolution of S. about. towards the bourgeois liberalism. In the beginning. 20th century in conditions of acute demarcation class. and political forces in Siberia among S. o. a right-wing, Kadet-monarchist trend arose (A. V. Adrianov, A. N. Hattenberger, N. N. Kozmin, and others) and a left one. The latter (E. E. Kolosov, P. Ya. Derber, and others) were close to the Socialist-Revolutionary Party. S. o. participated in the preparation of antisov. rebellion in Siberia. In the future, they actively collaborated with A.V. Kolchak, and with the restoration of Soviet power in Siberia, they fled abroad. Some S. about. (Potanin, Yadrintsev, Kozmin, P. M. Golovachev) made a significant contribution to the development of culture and science in Siberia - history, archeology, ethnography, geography.

The activity of S. o., as an extremely complex phenomenon, is assessed differently in the ist. literature: some historians (S. F. Koval, N. P. Mitina) consider the regionalism of the early stage of the revolutionary-democratic. flow, other researchers (M. G. Sesyunina, I. M. Razgon, etc.) - a kind of bourgeois. liberalism.

Lit.: Vetoshkin M.K., Sib. regionalism, "Modern World", 1913, No 3; Krusser G.V., Sib. regionals, (Novosib.), 1931; Gudoshnikov M., Class. the nature of regionalism, "Future Siberia", 1931, No 1; Stepanov N. L., P. A. Slovtsov (At the origins of Siberian regionalism), L., 1935; Sesyunina M. G., To the question of the origin of the Sib. regionalism, in collection: Questions of the history of Siberia, c. 2, Tomsk, 1965; Razgon I. M., Plotnikova M. E., G. N. Potanin in the years of socialist. revolution and civil wars in Siberia, ibid.; Mitina N.P., In the depths of Sib. Rud, M., 1966; Koval S. F., The nature of societies. movements of the 60s. 19th century in Siberia, in Sat.: Socio-political. movement in Siberia in 1861-1917, Novosib., 1967.

L. M. Goryushkin. Novosibirsk.

Soviet historical encyclopedia. - M.: Soviet Encyclopedia. Ed. E. M. Zhukova. 1973-1982 .

See what "SIBERIAN REGIONS" is in other dictionaries:

Representatives of the socio-political movement of the 2nd half. 19 early 20th century (G. N. Potanin, N. M. Yadrintsev and others); supporters of the autonomy of Siberia ... Big Encyclopedic Dictionary

Representatives of the socio-political movement of the 2nd half. 19 early 20th century (G. N. Potanin, N. M. Yadrintsev and others); supporters of the autonomy of Siberia. Political Science: Dictionary Reference. comp. Prof. floor of sciences Sanzharevsky I.I.. 2010 ... Political science. Dictionary.

Representatives of the socio-political movement of the second half of the XIX - early XX centuries. (G. N. Potanin, N. M. Yadrintsev and others); supporters of the autonomy of Siberia. * * * SIBERIAN REGIONAL SIBERIAN REGIONAL, representatives of the socio-political ... ... encyclopedic Dictionary

Representatives of the socio-political trend among the Siberian bourgeois and petty-bourgeois intelligentsia (mid-50s of the 19th century, beginning of the 20th century). Regionalism originated in the St. Petersburg circle of Siberian students (G. N. Potanin, N. M ...

- ... Wikipedia

I Siberia is a territory that occupies most of Northern Asia from the Urals in the west to the mountain ranges of the Pacific watershed in the east and from the shores of the Arctic Ocean in the north to the hilly steppes of the Kazakh SSR and the border with the MPR and China in the south. ... ... Great Soviet Encyclopedia

Ermak Timofeevich- (date of birth unknown 6.08. 1584 or 1585) Cossack ataman, leader of the campaign in Siberia, as a result of which the Siberian Khanate of Sheibanid Kuchum broke up and the beginning was laid. annexation of Siberia to Rus. gos wu. According to popular belief…… Ural Historical Encyclopedia

Portal for the student. Self-training

Tutoring

support us

See what "SIBERIAN REGIONS" is in other dictionaries:

RELATED ARTICLES