The Science Work
History
Site is for sale: mail@thesciencework.com
Category: History

Syndicalist "bias" in the Bolshevism (1905 1909)



SINDIKALISTSKY "BIAS" In the BOLSHEVISM (1905 - 1909)

The syndicalist movement became one of forms of social release "from below" at the beginning of the 20th century. The revolutionary syndicalism staked on direct action of workers, on direct capture by working class (but not political party or group) during the general strike of control over production and consecutive elimination of the state from public life. The Russian workers in 1905 acted in syndicalist spirit therefore the theory and practice of revolutionary syndicalism could not but draw close attention of the social democrats applying for ideological and organizational leadership in labor movement.

During the postrevolutionary period there was the whole group of Marxist intellectuals who participated in December events of 1905 in Moscow and in the next years did not give up hope "to reconsider Marxism and to use violence to overturn Nicholas II's government by means of the working revolt caused by a general strike" 1. In group of radical Marxists, "intrigued with syndicalism" 2, there were A.A. Bogdanov, A.V. Lunacharsky, V. Bazarov (V.V. Rudnev), I.I. Skvortsov-Stepanov, V.M. Shulyatnikov, M.N. Pokrovsky, N.A. Rozhkov, A.V. Sokolov (S. Volsky), V.M. Frich, G.A. Aleksinsky and others. The teacher Nikolay Vasilyev Krylenkov is also mentioned in documents of Department of police of that time ", he is Krylenko who after transition to syndicalists wrote the book with sharp criticism of all tactics of social democrat" 3.

Some prominent social democrats during this period forever left ranks of the party and became ideologists of the social and political direction, new to Russia, - anarcho-syndicalism. In particular, V.A. Posse in 1903 made the draft of the program of the Russian proletarians based on synthesis of the Marxist and kropotkiansky ideas, and since fall of 1905, upon return home of emigration, started development of cooperative and syndicalist model sotsializma4. D.I. Novomirsky (Ya.I. Kirillovsky) in 1901 - 1904 actively worked in the social democratic organizations of Umani and Odessa, was even elected the delegate to the III congress. At a congress it did not appear because as in emigration adjoined anarchists. Having returned in November, 1905 to Odessa, he created the anarcho-syndicalist Union kommunistov5.

Spiritual leadership in syndicalist "bias" belonged to A.A. Bogdanov and A.V. Lunacharsky.

In 1904 Bogdanov in the brochure "Socialism" suggested to use strikes and syndicates labor unions as means of class association of the proletariat and rational integration industrial predpriyatiy6. Future ideologist of the Left-wing radical Forward group expressed confidence that during "an era of the last fight" "the shabby cover, at last, will be dumped; then socialism will stop being only class cooperation of the proletariat and will capture production in its whole; then it will carry out the new organization of property and distribution, new public economy" 7.

Lunacharsky in 1905 in a series of articles under the general name "Mass Political Strike" issued a publicistic denial "deeply wrong" representation according to which "orthodox Marxists", that is Bolsheviks, place in the political center, and "extreme left" call anarchists syndicalists. He let know that the situation is just the opposite as "the true revolutionism is defined by neither frazistiky, nor ardent gesticulation" 8. Groundless he and the reproaches in narrowness which are put forward against the colleagues Bolsheviks - "not for considered whether what they do not want to neglect any tool of proletarian fight?" 9. On his belief shared and other leaders of the left social democracy (V.I. Lenin, by the way, edited these articles), at different stages of revolution along with a mass political strike "there will be highly useful both the state experience of parliamentarians, and purely political skills of party as also the syndicates capable immediately will be extremely useful to take in hand production" 10. "A party grief with tactics unilateral, - the Bolshevist publicist summarized. - "Narrow" Marxists will not neglect anything" 11.

In 1907 - probably to realize the sounded installation in practice - Lunacharsky decided to be engaged in more thorough research of political life of the Western European proletariat, "especially in syndicalism". At the same time he received guidelines from Lenin concerning what to begin with and on what to turn special vnimaniye12. M. Gorky reported in one of letters that the young Bolshevik works on the book which "is scary interesting on a subject at this time, it will make strong success": "Business goes about approach of the Bolshevism to syndicalism, that is about a possibility of merge of socialism to anarcho-socialism" 13. Lunacharsky so described the spiritual evolution at that time: "The first years of revolution passed for me in feverous, tiresome, separate and not always to expedient work. It led not only to exhaustion, but, on the course of events, and to a number of doubts concerning the party organization and tactics. Both the critical, and positive parties of the theory of revolutionary syndicalism which was not admiring me with many parties excited nevertheless to themselves huge interest. It seemed to me that acquaintance to revolutionary syndicalism will help also me and parties to resolve the terrible questions raised by life.," 14.

In 1907 under edition and with Lunacharsky's epilog the book by the famous Italian theorist of syndicalism Arturo Labriola "Reformizm and syndicalism" was published in St.-Petersburg. In an epilog quite strong theoretical bridges between revolutionary syndicalism and radical Marxism not only in some program questions, but also especially in tactics questions are built. In particular, the ideologist of a "vpere-dovsky" current specified, contrary to unitaristsky and centralistsky postulates of orthodox Marxism that "the central administration, elective and controllable, is not either the power, or the state". At the same time, however, he added that "only "unified plan" guarantees us against anarchy and periodic spasms" 15. As for political topic of the day, Lunacharsky was ready to recognize revolutionary syndicalism as the ally in fight against the general ideological opponent - reformism, "the doctrine as plague extended across Europe among socialists and threatening to undermine revolutionary consciousness of the proletariat" 16.

Fight against reformism became already relevant task for revolutionary forces of the West, over time the same had to occur also in Russia.

"Already as outstanding theorists of syndicalism perfect criticism weapon against reformists, - the Russian Marxist insisted, - they deserve our deep attention". According to him, "even those orthodox social democrats who see some extremes in syndicalism nevertheless recognize it as healthy reaction against the aspiration to make of socialist parties simple extreme left bourgeois democracies" 17.

According to Lunacharsky, support of the syndicalist movement not only is an important factor of development of socialist forces on the way to revolution, but "the fact that social revolution, the final victory can be gained only by confederation of syndicates" 18 is still much more important. Therefore in an epilog he suggested to refuse the idea of creation of strong party as purely political organization as well as from illusion about efficiency of purely economic struggle. Parties represent the ideological unions uniting representatives of various classes. Syndicates are a "natural" form class, that is based on community of an economic situation, the organization of workers. "On what we build, Marxists? - he asked a question. - Whether on an ideological prerequisite of purity of ideology, tradition or an economic prerequisite - class situation?". Also answers this question in the spirit of quite syndicalist: the party can be crowded with alien elements ("ideology - a thing shaky"), and the proletariat at all possible delusions all the same will return on a right class position. "Therefore, - Lunacharsky believed, - it is difficult to trust blindly even in the best party and it is difficult to turn a back to the worst, but purely-working to syndicate" 19. As the summary the Marxist theorist stated a wish that socialist parties managed to bring up the syndicalist movement in the required spirit. And when it will occur, "when all professionals will become socialists and will register in party", then there will be a natural and deep merge of revolutionary and party and revolutionary and trade-union currents. So far "where the party began to decay, there, perhaps, even syndicates in even infantile state - are preferable" 20.

In August, 1907 Lunacharsky participated in work of the International socialist congress in Stuttgart. It presented Bolsheviks to "the commissions about syndicalism, having the opponent not of whom of another there as Ple-hanova" 21. Some Soviet historians claimed that in this commission future Soviet people's commissar of education defended "the Lenin line of party membership of labor unions" 22. However actually everything was not so simply and unambiguously as Lunacharsky sought to draw the line in the commission on a problem of relationship of political parties and labor unions and even tried in this plan to influence Lenin. In particular he, by his own words, quite agreed with the leader of Bolshevist delegation about upholding of "the Belgian type", that is "on strengthening of socialist] agit [ation] in the ranks of labor unions, on inclusion

concordants on that syndicates in party on equal terms with purely party organizations, on establishment of organizational communication between the central institutions of both parts the slave to the [ochy] movement on equal terms". Lenin agreed also "concerning need to emphasize that fight sindik [at] does not come down to fight for improvement of life within capitalist society, but that they will play a crucial role from this point of view of the most social revolution" 23.

In polemic with Plekhanov who supported full neutrality of labor unions Lunacharsky won round most of members of the commission, insisting on the maximum ideological and organizational proximity of party and labor unions "not only in order that p I could save [Arti] young the slave [ochy] move [eniye] from a professionalism fate] and other children's diseases and and in order that organized masses could control and refresh party" 24. In this regard the young Bolshevik quite appropriate spoke about "truly syndicalist] spirit" which he with the adherent V. Bazarov (V.V. Rudnev) tried to introduce in party zhizn25.

"I gradually prepare Lenin", - significantly wrote Lunacharskiy26. In the evening, after the debate in the commission, it had a long conversation with Lenin, having stated it almost all the new ideas. "Pointed also that the gap between us, "heretics", - in the opinion of Plekhanov, - and Bolsheviks of steadfast type would be death for the Bolshevism], and would probably turn us into groundless writers, small [olshevik] ov new type would push to noncritical syndicalism" 27. According to Lunacharsky, the interlocutor "it is scary attentive" him listened and told: "All this is very similar to the truth. It is new and it is important" 28. In turn Lenin in one of articles then noted that in Stuttgart he "was solidary in all essential with comrade Voinov (A.V. Lunacharsky's pseudonym. - B.C.)" 29.

Future Soviet people's commissar of justice N.V. Krylenko who under the pseudonym A. Bram published the book "In search of Orthodoxy" in 1909 became one of Bolsheviks of new type who carried out deep drift in ideological space of syndicalism. Considerably treating the Marxist theory of the state, he claimed that state mechanism, being in bourgeoisie hands at the same time the tool of coercion and one of ways of assignment of the surplus value, "objectively has to disappear together with a private property and all system of wage labor and, per se, it also cannot be used by the proletariat in his purposes as also any capitalist as the tool for expropriation of expropriators" 30 cannot be used.

Marx, drew Krylenko, emphasized indissoluble interrelation of the state and exploiter bourgeois society therefore, speaking about gaining the political power by the proletariat, he meant rather a fight for psychological recognition of hegemony of working class other social groups, but not direct capture of state mechanism. The founder's imitators (in particular, Karl Kautsky), on the contrary, saw a main goal of labor movement in mastering state machinery parliamentary methods as considered the state as the above class social tool by means of which it is possible to enter socialism. The author considered similar representations absolutely incorrect as, according to him, "neither the state is a basis of a socialist system, nor the proletariat not only that does not want, but also cannot if even wanted, take control of state machinery" 31.

Having designated antietatistsky and anti-parliamentary accents of Marxist "orthodoxy" in the first part, Krylenko passed directly to the subject "Marxism and syndicalism" (the second part of the book quite so is called). Leaning on marksovo definition of the state as tools of class domination in antagonistic society, the revolutionary publicist allocated several functions of the state: police officers (ensuring protection against external threats and internal administrative management), hozyaystvennoregulyativny and cultural. According to the author of the book, function of external defense of the bourgeois states more and more loses the actual content as development of heavy-duty multinational corporations actually cancels all frontiers and turns the national governments from "representatives of the population of the country" into "servants of the capital" 32. Along with it in internal political life of the capitalist countries strengthening of a repressive role of the government which is more and more obviously used by the bourgeoisie for the adoption of the class domination is noted.

The author noted reduction of the state prerogatives and in the economic sphere. It is caused, on the one hand, by centralization and integration of production by forces of financial and industrial oligarchy, and with another - development of labor movement and expansion of influence of labor unions and other associations of workers.

As for the social sphere, and here, according to the author, the value of amateur public organizations which successfully compete with government structures more and more increases. In particular, the labor exchanges organized by labor unions, working bureaus and the statistical commissions, according to him, do not concede in anything to official analogs, but in the meantime the institutions of secondary and higher education which are exclusively controlled by the state represent not cultural institutions, and "the organizations of police character, nurseries of hypocrisy and Pietism" 33.

In general, Krylenko noted, repressive, "police" functions of the state Leviathan, all others steadily increase - "die off and pass to institutions of the proletariat" 34. The authoritative and state superstructure towering over society bears to a people at large more harm, than advantage. Therefore the future social revolution has to destroy this superstructure and transfer an administrative initiative to hands of federation of free production communes. Therefore, the Russian Marxist specifies, the relevant slogan of revolution is "not capture of state machinery, but overthrow of political domination of the bourgeois" 35.

For the author of the book obviously that the parliaments guarding the interests of a private property and the capital are not capable to liquidate a painful outgrowth of repressive statehood. On his belief, the striking power capable to save society from costs of the violent power, amateur democratic associations of workers are. Already in the bowels of capitalist economy during rapid development of the proletarian movement strong bases of a collectivist system so "the state decays earlier are created, than managed ""to die off"" 36. During the social revolution, Krylenko believed, the organized proletariat uses an imperious resource, perhaps, even in the form of dictatorship, however it will be "the power for a moment", caused by need of systematic transfer of means of production to the order of workers.

In his book not only violent, but also peace forms class borby37 were considered. However it was meant that only direct action it is possible to achieve a radical revolution in the system of the economic and political relations. The general strike (which zealous adherents were revolutionary syndicalists) will become the first stage of revolutionary fight, as envisioned by Krylenko, "it with relentless logic of events will be followed by the second stages of fight" 38.

Deepening of antietatistsky trends of Marxism both at the level of the basic principles, and at the level of revolutionary tactics became a result of the book of Krylenko. It is possible even to claim that search of Marxist "orthodoxy" actually brought the radical social democrat into doctrinal space of revolutionary syndicalism. It was indirectly recognized also by Krylenko who in the 1920th with satisfaction noted that all that healthy that he apprehended from syndicalism, "became the official program of communism" 39.

In general it is quite obvious that, trying to find a common ground between doctrines of revolutionary syndicalism and radical Marxism, maximal adjusted Bolshevist theorists of new generation proceeded from realities of political life (influence of syndicalist methods of the organization and fight in the proletarian environment of the western countries and Russia) and also for reasons of political pragmatism (need to use all means for fight against reformist, opportunistic forces in the socialist movement and also with class opponents of the proletariat in general).

Judging by Lenin Articles 1907 - 1908, the leader of Bolsheviks also accepted in syndicalism all that corresponded, according to him, to "a problem of the Bolshevist direction", namely: revolutionary work in labor unions, an exit from a narrow framework of parliamentary "kunstshtyuk" to broad lands of organized class fight, "ability to use (and preparation of masses for an opportunity to use successfully) a general strike and also "December forms of fight" in the Russian revolution" 40. According to Lenin, the syndicalism is an acceptable ideological ally of the Bolshevism when he acts as a radical antithesis to various political trends which are taking away working class from active revolutionary fight. "In Western Europe, - the Bolshevist leader claimed, - the revolutionary syndicalism in many countries was direct and inevitable result of opportunism, reformism, parliamentary cretinism. At us the first steps of "the Duma activity" strengthened opportunism in enormous sizes too, brought Mensheviks to servility before cadets". In this regard "the syndicalism cannot but develop on the Russian soil as reaction against this shameful behavior of "outstanding" social democrats" 41.

on the other hand, the leader of Bolsheviks found some lines which give his similarity to "old "economism"" in the syndicalism. These lines which, he considered, cannot be acceptable as well as former forms of opportunism, Lenin formulated so: "1) "anarchical friability of the organization" (it quoted quotes from Lunacharsky's article about the relation of party to labor unions" - V.S.); 2) nervous inflation of workers instead of creation of a strong "stronghold of the class organization"; 3) petty-bourgeois and individualistic lines of an ideal and prudonovs-which theories; 4) ridiculous "disgust for policy"" 42.

If to lay aside not quite objective, purely emotional criticism (Lenin and itself often showed "disgust for the policy" taking the forms of "opportunism, reformism, parliamentary cretinism"), then it is possible to note quite pragmatic relation of the conducting Bolshevist theorist to an ideological and tactical arsenal of syndicalism. He did not consider it necessary to subject to full-scale severe criticism this at all "revisionism at the left" as it "far not so still developed as the revisionism opportunistic, was not internationalized, did not sustain any large practical fight with socialist party at least of one country" 43. At the same time Lenin, after Lunacharsky, quite could repeat that Bolsheviks "will not neglect anything": he was ready to incorporate "one-sided" anti-opportunism and anti-parliamentarism of syndicalism in wider tactics of "revolutionary social democracy" aimed at repetition of experience of the Commune of Paris and a December revolt of 1905 44 In this way probably and it is necessary to understand his words in the letter to Lunacharsky: "Bolshevism. live will manage to take all from syndicalism to kill the Russian syndicalism and opportunism. And only we can from the revolutionary, but not pe-dantski-cadet point of view of Plekhanov and To, disprove the syndicalism bearing with itself confusion darkness." 45.

It is not necessary to exaggerate, of course, theoretical "curtsey" of the leading Bolsheviks towards syndicalism: such attempt is done, for example, by R. Williams concerning Lunacharsky. (At the same time it is impossible to call correct and a position of the Soviet researchers who ignored syndicalist "evasion" of future people's commissar prosveshcheniya46.) The American researcher, in particular, quotes the Russian Bolshevik who wrote in article "Narrow-mindedness and Individualism" that "syndicate and the union of syndicates up to their international confederation which ripens before our eyes again is both result and the reason of the greatest kollektivistichesky bent of the proletariat" 47. But further Lunacharsky noted that owing to difficult conditions of everyday life, the proletariat "culturally far is not necessary at height of the ideal, the organizational principles and the historical role" therefore in the class development it reasonably uses ideological services and mentoring of the intellectuals, "passing to the proletarian point of view" 48. In the unpublished brochure "Question of Relationship of Party and Labor Unions on the Stuttgart International Congress" (1907) the theorist - "vperedovets" characterized the trade-union (syndicalist) organization of workers as manifestation of growth of the new world and a new order again. At the same time he resolutely rejected mistakes of syndicalists, their apolitical, not Marxist conclusions from Marx's provisions and expresses the deep belief "in these provisions and Marxist conclusions from them" 49.

Lenin also pretty fast passed to rigid opposition to syndicalist hobbies of the party fellows. For example, in September, 1907 in the preface to the collection "In 12 Years", the leader of Bolsheviks recognized that from the moment of a work exit "What to do?" (1902) he supported neutrality of labor unions, however the London congress of RSDRP and the Stuttgart congress forced it "to come to a conclusion that neutrality of labor unions essentially cannot be defended. The closest rapprochement of the unions with party - such is only right principle" 50.

Bolsheviks hoped to win round protest and political and institutional capacity of the syndicalism which had considerable influence in the international labor movement to strengthen itself it by vital force. However fight for ideological influence in a Bolshevist wing of RSDRP turned a syndicalism problem, along with the known philosophical contradictions, into "apple of discord" between the leading ideologists of the Russian left social democracy. The radical Bolshevist concept of Bogdanov who staked on tactics of direct action of masses for many veterans of the First Russian revolution seemed more preferable than much more moderate "Duma" tactics of Lenin that could not but cause concerns of the last concerning the prospects of his leadership in Bolshevist fraction.

In April, 1908 the leader of Bolsheviks, on his own expression, published in the press - in article "Marxism and Revisionism" - "the most formal declaration of war" and though he hoped "to separate from party (fractional) affairs philosophy" 51, in it not only the promise to discredit philosophical "revisionism" of Bogdanov and it edinomyshlennikov52 was heard. One of objects of criticism designated also political "revisionism at the left" which "appeared in the Romance countries now as the "revolutionary syndicalism" seeking to adapt to Marxism, "to correct" ego53.

In the next several years along with eradication of "ultimatizm", "otzovizm" and "bogostroitelstvo", in the ranks of Lenin fraction there was an active fight against a current which R. Williams successfully characterized as "the anti-parliamentary Bolshevist synthesis of Marxism and syndicalism inspired by experience of 1905 and collectivist philosophy of Bogdanov" 54.

It is impossible to claim that Lenin's victory was predetermined (he was even going to leave fraction in case of a victory "left" opponentov55), however, having given battle to "vperedovets" on the philosophical field, the leader of Bolsheviks made everything and for discredit of political postulates of the maximal colleagues, at the same time their ultra-radicalism just and was the main object of its severe criticism. In June, 1909 in Paris at the initiative of Lenin the meeting of expanded newspaper editorial office "Proletary" took place (the actual central body of Bolshevist fraction in 1906 - 1909) at which it was specified that "otzovizm" and "ultimatizm" in the attempts of theoretical self-determination come to denial of fundamentals of revolutionary Marxism. Tactics of the ultraradicals demanding refusal of legal forms of political activity - it was specified in the resolution written by Lenin, - "inevitably conducts to a complete separation with tactics of the left wing of the international social democracy attached to modern conditions, leading to anarchical evasion" 56.

However, having expelled from the governing bodies the maximal elements (in particular Bogdanova (Maximova) 57), Leninists were not going to refuse syndicalist tools of the organization of workers and class fight for which "the maksimovsky fraction" stood up. Lenin in the articles of this period sharply criticized "Maximov and To" for introduction into the Russian social democratic environment of elements of ideological anarchism and at the same time, along with preservation of illegal party and use of the Duma in the propaganda purposes, urged "to develop and use for socialism the various working organizations" 58.

Keen observers already at that time noted that opposition between Leninists and left, "boyevistsky", groups in Bolshevist fraction it is impossible to write off for the account of the interpersonal conflicts party vozhdey59. Lenin who made within several years ideological evolution from ballot strike in the I Duma to positive assessment "social democratic parliamentarism and a role of the Duma tribune for social democrats during a counterrevolution" caused discontent of considerable layers in the ranks of the fraction. Those layers which believed in fast approach of new revolutionary inflow and insisted on continuation of the "boykotistsky" and "boyevistsky" tactical line. These ultraradical layers operating under various fractional nicknames ("otzovist", "ultimatist", "vperedovets") became widespread enough, and not only on the periphery, but also in the largest party organizations - in St.-Petersburg, Moscow, Odessa, Ivanovo-Voznesensk and drugikh60. From ultraleft even charges to the leader of fraction of treason to ideals of revolutionary Marxism, in assistance to regeneration bolshevizma61 sounded. However, according to a fair remark of one eserovsky publicist, "it is not necessary to hypnotize itself this appearance of "treason of the leader"; it would mean to slide on a surface and not to notice deeper compliance" 62.

Bolsheviks, the eserovsky analyst wrote, were never basic adherents of methods of individual terror, as for mass direct action, after the victory of the royal mode over revolution of 1905 - 1907 this tactics sputtered out. Thus, "by the time of elections to the third Duma the Bolsheviks already accepted a number of prerequisites of refusal of boycott; Lenin others drew before from these prerequisites a logical conclusion" 63. Lenin tactics of a combination of illegal and legal methods of party activity in anticipation of new revolutionary upsurge became practical continuation of this conclusion. Weakness of a position of Bogdanov and other ultraradical Bolsheviks was that they, being fond of polemic attacks against Lenin, did not complement "negative revolutionism of a boykotizm" with "positive revolutionism of fighting tactics" 64. Lenin as a result managed to estimate more adequately arrangement of political forces in postrevolutionary Russia and to catch prevailing mood in masses therefore, despite political isolation of his group in fierce polemic with "right" and "left" in RSDRP, the Lenin tactical line in revolutionary movement prevailed.

In our opinion, exactly ability of the Bolshevist leader to understand psychology of the operated masses, readiness to listen to "live breath of life" and to draw constructive practical conclusions even if to the detriment of harmonious ideological dogmas and schemes, just and became factors of its convincing victory, both in a Bolshevist current, and in scales of the whole country at a new stage of the Russian revolution. Lenin before many other politicians realized the mighty force of the people at large which felt creators of the new social and economic and political relations for this reason he to certain limits welcomed organizational and ideological loans which were capable to strengthen the public and reformative force of Left-wing radical Marxism. The revolutionary syndicalism represented one of the most effective instruments of anti-capitalist mobilization of masses, and for this reason the Bolsheviks were ready to use at a certain stage means from a syndicalist arsenal for the solution of the tasks.

1 Williams R. C. Collective Immorality: The Syndicalist Origins of Proletarian Culture, 1905 - 1910//Slavic Review. 1980. Vol. 39. No. 3. P. 394.
2 Ibid.
3 Central Archive of the Nizhny Novgorod Region (CANNR). T. 918. Op. 8. 409. L. 9 about.-10.
4 See: Political parties of Russia. The end of XIX - the first third of the 20th century: Encyclopedia. M, 1996. Page 477.
5 In the same place. Page 402.
6 Williams R.C. Op. cit. River 395.
7 A.A. Bogdanov. Socialism in the present//A.A. Bogdanov. Socialism questions: Works of different years. M, 1990. Page 100.
8 A.V. Lunacharsky. Mass political strike. Article II//Literary inheritance. T. 80. V.I. Lenin and A.V. Lunacharsky: Correspondence, reports, documents. M, 1971. Page 564.
9 In the same place.
10 In the same place. Page 568.
11 In the same place.
12 Williams R. C. Op. cit. River 395.
13 A.M. Gorky's archive. T. IV. A.M. Gorky. Letters to K.P. Pyatnitsky. M, 1954. Page 210-211.
14 A.V. Lunacharsky. Autobiographical note//Literary inheritance. T. 82.

A.V. Lunacharsky: Unpublished materials. M, 1970. Page 552-553.

15 A.V. Lunacharsky. Epilog//Labriola A. Reformizm and syndicalism. Under edition and with A. Lunacharsky's epilog. SPb., 1907. Page 264.
16 In the same place. Page 247.
17 In the same place.
18 In the same place. Page 256.
19 In the same place. Page 257.
20 In the same place.
21 From A.V. Lunacharsky's letters to the wife//Literary inheritance. T. 80. Page 622.
22 See, e.g.: V.I. Lenin. Half-N of SOBR. soch. T. 16. Page 515.
23 From A.V. Lunacharsky's letters to the wife. Page 622.
24 In the same place.
25 In the same place.
26 From A.V. Lunacharsky's letters to the wife. T. 80. Page 624.
27 In the same place. Page 625.
28 In the same place.
29 V.I. Lenin. The preface to the brochure by Voinov (A.V. Lunacharsky) about the relation of party to labor unions//V.I. Lenin. Half-N of SOBR. soch. T. 16. Page 187.
30 A. Bram. In search of orthodoxy. SPb., 1909. Page 63.
31 In the same place. Page 268.
32 In the same place. Page 273.
33 In the same place. Page 277.
34 In the same place. Page 278.
35 In the same place. Page 281.
36 In the same place.
37 In the same place. Page 276.
38 In the same place. Page 282.
39 See: Figures of the USSR and revolutionary movement of Russia. Encyclopedic dictionary by Grenades. M, 1989. Page 467.
40 See: V.I. Lenin. The preface to the brochure by Voinov (A.V. Lunacharsky)... Page 189.
41 In the same place. Page 188-189.
42 In the same place. Page 190.
43 V.I. Lenin. Marxism and revisionism//V.I. Lenin. Half-N of SOBR. soch. T. 17. Page 25.
44 See: V.I. Lenin. The preface to the brochure by Voinov (A.V. Lunacharsky)... Page 189-190.
45 V.I. Lenin - to A.V. Lunacharsky [on November 11, 1907]//V.I. Lenin. Half-N of SOBR. soch. T. 47. M, 1970. Page 116-117.
46 See, e.g.: Kornoukhoyey.M. Fight of Bolshevik party against anarchism in Russia. M, 1981. Page 68.
47 Williams R.C. Op. cit. River 397.
48 A.V. Lunacharsky. Narrow-mindedness and individualism//A.V. Lunacharsky. Collectivism philosophy essays. SPb., 1909. Page 326-327.
49 See: Williams R.C. Op. cit. River 396.
50 V.I. Lenin. The preface to the collection "In 12 Years"//V.I. Lenin. Half-N of SOBR. soch. T. 16.

Page 108.

51 V.I. Lenin - to A.M. Gorky [on April 16, 1908]//V.I. Lenin. Half-N of SOBR. soch. T. 47.

Page 155.

52 V.I. Lenin. Marxism and revisionism. Page 20.
53 In the same place. Page 25.
54 Williams R. C. Op. cit. River 397.
55 V.I. Lenin - to V.V. Vorovsky [on July 1, 1908]//V.I. Lenin. Half-N of SOBR. soch. T. 47.

Page 160.

56 V.I. Lenin. Resolutions of a meeting of expanded editorial office of Proletary. About an otzovizm and an ultimatizm//V.I. Lenin. Half-N of SOBR. soch. T. 19. Page 36-37.
57 In the same place. Page 42.
58 See: V.I. Lenin. About fraction of supporters of an otzovizm and bogostroitelstvo//Lenin

V.I. Half-N of SOBR. soch. T. 19. Page 79-80.

59 Article "Crisis of the Bolshevism"//Lenin collection. T. XXV. M, 1933. Page 193.
60 See: Fight of Lenin party against petty-bourgeois groups and currents. M, 1981.

C. 79, 80.

61 Nicholas Harry's article "Ghost"//Lenin collection. T. XXV. M, 1933. Page 198.
62 Article "Crisis of the Bolshevism"//Lenin collection. T. XXV. Page 194.
63 In the same place. Page 194-195.
64 In the same place. Page 195.
David Kristian Blaze
Other scientific works: