Russian Factor in the Military and Political Conflicts of Europe in 1917–1920

Статья посвящена т. н. «русскому фактору» в период после окончания Первой мировой войны и до 1920г. Революционные события в России радикально изменили внешнеполитическую ситуацию на европейском театре и одновременно стали оказывать серьезное влияние на внутреннюю повестку стран участниц конфликта, благодаря активной политике Советской России по продвижению революционных идей и поддержке революционных движений в Европе. Подобная практика была вызвана не столько искренним желанием раздуть революционный пожар и безусловной верой в его возможность, сколько необходимостью физического выживания молодого «пролетарского государства» во враждебном капиталистическом окружении. В статье подробно рассматривается идеологическая подоплека внешней политики Советской России в это период и деятельность на этом поприще ее вождя В.И. Ленина, его попытки повлиять на общественно-политические процессы в Германии, Венгрии и Польше, а также анализируются изменения в идеологической повестке большевиков после провала советской политики по созданию плацдармов для продвижения революции в центральную Европу. Также в статье обращается внимание на то, что за внешней ширмой буржуазной революции в России явно проступают признаки целенаправленной политики по удалению с карты Европы и Азии империй — Османской, Германской, Австро-Венгерской и Российской, чему предшествовала активная компания по девальвации самих монархических институтов. Большевистская же политика по полному демонтажу прежней системы, несмотря на внешнюю враждебность идеологических установок, оказалась вполне приемлемой для тех, кто стремился не допустить пересборки Центральных держав. The article deals with the influence of the so-called Russian factor in the events following the end of the First World War up until 1920. The revolution in Russia radically changed the situation in Europe, having a major impact on the domestic and foreign policies of the belligerent nations, caused by active Soviet support for revolutionary movements in Europe. This practice stemmed not from a sincere desire to fan the revolutionary flames but rather from the survival instinct of the newly-established proletarian state, surrounded by hostile capitalistic countries. The article examines the ideological motivations behind Soviet Russia's foreign policy during this period and the activities of its leader, Vladimir Lenin, as well as his attempts to influence social and political processes in Germany, Hungary, and Poland. The study also analyzes the changes in the ideological agenda of the Bolsheviks after the failure of Soviet policy to create springboards for the advancement of the revolution into Central Europe. Moreover, the paper points out that the smokescreen of the revolution in Russia reveals clear signs of a concerted effort to wipe the Ottoman Empire, the German Empire, the Austro-Hungarian Empire, and the Russian Empire from the map of Europe and Asia, preceded by an active campaign aimed at undermining the monarchic institutions themselves. Meanwhile, the Bolshevik policy that sought to completely dismantle the old regime, despite the hostility of its ideology, eventually proved perfectly acceptable for those who aimed to prevent the Central Powers from rising up again.

Akaki Tsereteli’s unknown letter about repressions of year 1906

Part of Akaki Tsereteli’s creative legacy is still spread in different foundations or private collections. Difficulty about finding these writings is that some documents in various binders do not have description. Currently foundations are intensively being studied in order to create digital catalogues and whenever this process is finished, many interesting documents will be displayed. “Burning down Imereti during movement” is one of Akaki’s public letters which remained unknown until today. It will be published after 115 years in corresponding value of the writer's new academic publication of his works. Manuscript is being held at Kutaisi’s historic museum.“Burning down Imereti during movement” is about revolutionary movements and its echoes in Georgia, which took place in the years 1905-1907. On the one hand it is a bold protest against King’s cruel policy; Also, the article contains Akaki Tsereteli’s especially significant observations and thoughts about ongoing political processes.In the first paragraph of the article there is a very interesting observation of the author. According to his words, the Russian empire from the very beginning intended absolute occupation and annexation of Georgia. According to that, the friendly condition which led King Irakli of Kartli-Kakheti to let Russians in our country without war and blood, was definitely going to break. Akaki thought that everything that was done by Russian governance in our country, was provocative and its goal was to drag Georgian people into armed conflict.Events occurred in 1905 led to logical conclusions. Georgian nobles decided to officially demand national autonomy. On their emergency gathering they created an appropriate document and presented it to the emperor. Surely, the empire would not let Georgia restore their autonomy. They needed a reason to finally destroy us and the reason found out to be that revolutionary movement which was widespread not only in Russia, but also its subordinate countries including Georgia.According to Akaki Tsereteli, a significant part of society was against Georgia’s partaking in revolt from the beginning. They had reasonable suspicion that if the revolutionary movement would be defeated, this would totally change the perspective of Georgian-Russian relationship. Unfortunately, following events proved the correctness of this assumption - Georgians were pled guilty for separatism and it led to very brutal repressions. The events that occurred in Georgia were outrageous for Akaki. That is why he makes fun of Russia in his article and boldly declares that the decision of the government - campaigning against unarmed and helpless people, is worthless and unseemly.

Imperial legality through ‘Exception’: Gun control in the Russian Empire

Several days after a failed assassination attempt on the life of the Russian Tsar on 2 April 1879, a new regime of ‘permission to exercise the right to purchase and carry weapons’ was introduced in St. Petersburg. Despite the fact that the first attempt on Alexander II's life occurred in 1866 (also in St. Petersburg), it took 13 years to make a radical departure from the previously unrestricted regime of access to arms in the capital of the Russian Empire. In this article, I analyse archival materials documenting how this new regime of weapons ownership was implemented. In particular, I am interested in the dimensions of locality and temporality in the practices by which imperial legislation introduced gun control in St. Petersburg and Warsaw, the Russian Empire's most cosmopolitan cities. The archival documents that I rely on show that the gun control regulations that were intended to be a repressive act of the authorities in reality unfolded as a process of negotiations and merciful exclusions. The intermediaries of the imperial legal order reacted to the international challenges that were posed by emergent revolutionary movements, including the negotiation of the permissible restriction of subjects’ rights. As a result, new practices of ‘public safety’ were implemented as exceptional measures – both locally and temporally. This article sheds light on the imperial legal regime of gun control as a practice of ‘exception’.

Symbiosis and Revolution: The Soviet Encounter with the War in Dhofar

This article discusses how the Soviet Union perceived and related to Middle Eastern revolutionary movements, using a case study from South Yemen and the War in Dhofar. This specific Soviet encounter will be analysed through selected Soviet material from published and archival sources. The article highlights how Soviet representatives assessed prospects for socialism in Yemen, and how they interacted with their partners on the ground. The article is divided into three parts: the first discusses the theoretical debates in Soviet academia and the press, the second section contrasts these theoretical views with Middle Eastern ‘socialist’ theories during the Cold War and the third shows how a symbiosis developed between Soviet and Yemeni institutions and organisations. The article argues that due to an Orientalist take on South Yemen and Dhofar, the Soviet side could not appreciate the political importance and potential of socialist currents in the region, reducing cooperation to ‘pragmatism’.

Georg Lukács in the Labyrinth of Coexistence

"This text attempts to trace the evolution of the political and philosophical thought of Georg Lukács, after his magnum opus History and class consciousness, as well as the influence that historical events had on this evolution. Against the dominant consensus that dismisses Lukács’s late work as an effect of his alleged “reconciliation with reality”, I argue that the line of continuity in his thought was the idea of peaceful coexistence, derived from the objective conditions – the isolation of the Soviet Union and the stabilization of Western capitalism. So, rather than explaining his choice to defend coexistence, or “socialism in one country” as a consequence of his reconciliation with, or surrender to Stalinism, one should see his compromise with Stalinism as a consequence of this choice. His commitment to the coexistence thesis shaped his final version of Marxism in a number of ways. From a political perspective, a readjustment of the temporal scale of the transition to socialism in post-revolutionary society constrained him to advocate a more realist strategy that combined revolutionary movements with evolutionary processes – this was reflected in his option for the Popular Front strategy and later in his support for the Western pacifist movements. His late philosophical work also bears the marks of this enduring political choice. Keywords: Coexistence, Marxism, irrationalism, Stalinism, democratization, socialism "

Ideology in Polish Translations of Anglo-American Literature

Ideology has always influenced translation, yet this fact became a topic of scholarly research only in the 1990s. The working of ideology in literary translations most often manifests itself as a conflict of value systems. From vast reservoir of foreign sources, the native axiology absorbs values that it needs to sustain its culture. It is not a coincidence that Anglo-American literature, propagating ideas of democracy and individual freedom, became popular in Poland in the first half of the nineteenth-century when Poland did not exist as a state. Only a century later, American literature was the most popular of all foreign literatures in pre-1939 Poland. World War II changed this situation, and the Soviet-controlled apparatchiks favored translations that were “politically correct.” Yet, because of their connections with earlier revolutionary movements, avant-garde Anglo-American writers were often published during the communist regime, for example Virginia Woolf, whose novels were standardized to appeal to the tastes of popular readers. After Poland regained independence in 1989, the national book market was privatized and commercialized, and avant-garde literature needed advertising to get noticed. Cormack McCarthy’s novels were translated into Polish on the wave of popularity of the Coen brothers movie based on No Country for Old Men. The two Polish translations of McCarthy’s novel try to sound like a typical hard-boiled realistic fiction. This is where the ideology of consumerism meets the ideology of communism: literature is a means to sustain – and control – a cultural monolith, where all differences are perceived as possible threats to social order.

The typicality of the Vietnamese people's national liberation struggle for the

The Vietnamese people's resistance war against the US imperialists' invasion to gain national liberation and reunification in the 20th century was a struggle expressing the Vietnamese people's intense desire for peace and national reunification and opposing the American neo-colonialism. The struggle of the Vietnamese people was deeply epochal, and typical of the national liberation movement in the world. This was not merely a struggle for national liberation, but also a struggle that reflected and fully converged three major revolutionary trends of the era: national independence, democracy and socialism. The article focuses on presenting brief outlines of the struggle for national independence, typical features of the Vietnamese people's struggle for national liberation, and puts it in the relationship between the revolution in Vietnam and revolutionary movements in the world. As a result, not only the value and aspiration for peace of the Vietnamese people and progressive humanity, but also the art of combining national strength with the strength of the times in the American war was recognized.

Political Change in Liberalism: Carl Poper’s perspective as an example

Liberalism does not have one perspective on political changes. Classical liberalism places great emphasis on individual freedom and opposes state interference in the private affairs of individuals. From this standpoint, Liberalism accepts revolutionary movements against oppressive regimes that violate individuals’ freedom. The idea of freedom is central in neoliberalism, particularly in social welfares, to provide people decent conditions for pursuing a good life or for human flourishing and therefore the neoliberalism perspective opts for a limited interference by the state in the market. The different perspectives of neoliberalism can trace their roots back to classical liberalism’s arguments, which encourage individuals’ freedom and opt for limit state interference, while in terms of political change, they have conservative views and in this regard, Karl Poper is with the gradual changes of society and rejects the revolutionary mechanism because it threatens freedom and leads to tyranny