Citizen Movements in Russia
Citizen Movements in Russia
Background
Russia is the sixth largest economy in the world. The country is a member of the UN Security council, the G20 and the G8. Conversely, like any other country, Russia is faced with a number of economic, social and political issues. Accordingly, Russia has one of the weakest institutions in the world. For instance, with respect to institutional development, the country was ranked number 133 out of 144 in the World Economic Forum’s Global Competitiveness Index 2012-2013. Subsequently, the development of institutions in the country is one big challenge for Russia. This is contributed to by the high levels of corruption and other inefficiencies in the government. Thus, compared to other countries which are at the same level of development as Russia, the country has higher rates of corruption. Consequently, irrespective of the fat that Russia is the sixth largest economy, its rate of corruption is higher than that of Uganda and Togo. Social cohesion in the country is also low because people lack trust in the institutions. The citizens, thus the public and nongovernment institutions engage in activism with the aim of making their country better. This paper is going to explore activities carried out by Russian citizens to promote social reform.
Russian Intelligentsia
Prior to the occurrence of the First World War, the intelligentsia became an important aspect of the Russian society. Some of the people who were involved in the development and establishment of intelligentsia were Novikov and Radischvev (Tolstoy, 1978). This happened in the late 18th century. These two were dissident members of nobility, who dared to raise their concerns regarding criticism of the inhumanities of serfdom. The main aim of intelligentsia was to oppose and criticize the occasional barbarities and fundamental iniquities of tsarism as explicated by Tolstoy (1978). It encompassed people from different fraternities including lawyers, professional, authors, painters and scientists. Some of the criticism took a relatively subtle form for instance, like the discovery of the suffering and pain suffered by those in the lower orders of the society as exhibited through the Repin’s painting The Barge Haulers (Tolstoy, 1978).
Activism was not and had not been an easy task. In fact, those who have engaged in it are daring. With respect to Berdiaev (1994), the intelligentsia for instance led to assassinations and overt political violence. This was executed mostly by the government officials including militant intellectuals and police from tsar. Irrespective of the fact that most of the members of the intelligentsia were intellectuals, not all intellectuals supported and participated in intelligentsia activities (Berdiaev, 1994). Most of the university graduates and professional dedicated their lives to furthering their careers in the service of the church, the state or the private commerce and industry. Thus, they were not concerned with the issues affecting the wider society. Thus, most of the creative intellectuals were not a part of the political criticism of the intelligentsia (Berdiaev, 1994). Accordingly, intelligentsia considered itself to be a special minority or a king of monastic or chivalric order which was different from the rest of the society as elucidated by Struve (1994). The difference was because intelligentsia was devoted to higher moral goals pertaining to servicing the people. Those who were members of this group sacrificed their security, comfort and even lives to prevent the deprivation of the moral imperative.
Members of the intelligentsia engaged in a number of activities to ensure social reforms. Accordingly, they went into the villages and executed their skills as engineers, agronomists, doctors and teachers with the goal of improving the lives of the peasants (Radishchev, n.d). They were supported by the church which granted them permission to carry out their activities. Other members organized political groupings while integrating a wide range of ideological spectrum from anarchism to conservatism. Through these political meetings, they were able to form nuclei of the political parties which came into existence in the early 20th century (Turgenev, 1965). In 1914, regardless of the fact that intelligentsia was divided into two groups; political and artistic sides, the members were still united by its idealism. Intelligentsia was marked by a sense of duty founded on education, privileges skills and the hope of transforming the future Russia.
As stipulated by Struve (1994), in 1917, tsarism met its downfall. This presented new opportunities for the different sections of intelligentsia including the artistic and political sections. Those who were conservative members of the intelligentsia considered themselves to be reluctant revolutionaries. The reluctance was founded on the fear that if major political changes were adopted and set in motion, it would not be hard for them to be controlled. Their fears were well-informed in the sense that the initiative passed rapidly from the side of the center-right and shifted to the radicals of the Petrograd Soviet (Radishchev, n.d). At the time of the formation of Petrograd Soviet, it was pre-eminently a representation of the mainstream of the radical intelligentsia with respect to some of its ideological hues (Berlin, 2008). Irrespective of the fact that the number of peasants, workers and soldiers outnumbered members of intelligentsia of the Soviet, the leading positions were still held by the members of the intelligentsia. The revolutionary politics in 1917 was marked by a series of competitions between intelligentsia groups of which the groups wanted to form a stable alliance that would lead to an escalation in the revolutionary mass movement (Turgenev, 1965).
Intelligentsia commenced as a miniature group of intellectuals which was distinct from the rest of the population by their belief in reason in place of superstition, western orientation, education and social origin. Conversely, the group became a powerful political force was has the ability of overthrowing the established order (Berdiaev, 1994). Thus, their influence was massive and led to numerous changes in Russia. In accordance with Zubok (2009), Proletkul’t is a component of the intelligentsia which was dominated by Bolsheviks. The Bolsheviks did not harmonize with Lenin on a number of issues that were considered to be vital in the society. Regardless of this, the Proletku’l (The Proletarian Cultural-Educational Association) was allowed to set up an extensive local network comprising of organizations (Zubok, 2009). This made Proletkul’t to be one of the largest civilian organizations in Russia. It comes after the trade unions and the party.
The main goal of Proletkul’t was to establish a truly working class intelligentsia hence adopting the working class culture. Different strategies and extensive efforts were integrated to educate those in the working class group and to identify worker painters and worker poets with the aimed of developing a proletarian culture marked by cooperation and collectivism (Zubok, 2009). However, Protelkul’t declined after 1920. Its decline was partly for the reason that suspicion grew regarding the motives of its leaders. On the other hand, Lenin considered its establishment as a way of dividing the party. Another form of revolution in the Russian society is the Cultural Revolution (Zubok, 2009). This form of revolution was undertaken from 1928 to 1931 (Berdiaev, 1994).
Nonetheless, the Cultural Revolution was swallowed up because its members were forced to keep silence, they were killed, and some were forced into exile while some were imprisoned. It has managed to break their power. The members were replaced by undereducated and undertrained graduates of the Society education system (Zubok, 2009). These who took these positions responded to Stalin’s proletarian chauvinism. The results of their actions were disastrous in practical terms leading to a partial reversal of the policy in 1931 (Zubok, 2009). Conversely, according to Raeff (1966), irrespective of being swallowed up, Cultural Revolution managed to break the power of the Lenin part and its institutions to the point that they would no longer enjoy relative intellectual freedom.
Women and Activism
Women in Russia have historically been faced with issues pertaining to empowerment, power and gender. Nevertheless, women have used different avenues to address issues with regard to activism, citizenship and feminism amidst market reforms. The non-governmental organizations have played a big role in helping women and other groups to stage their activism for instance Hemmet (2007). At first, women commenced advocating for social reform by fighting for gender equality. There were two groups of women which participated in the feminist movement. The “socialist-oriented women believed that women’s emancipation could be guaranteed only by revolution, “bourgeois” feminists -as they were derided –placed emphasis on gaining political and economic rights…” (Hemmet, 2007, p.7). Irrespective of the differences, both groups perceived their struggle to be a component of the social liberation.
In order to successfully take part in activism, it is important for the people participating to have a strong voice and have huge numbers of supporters. In this case, regardless of the fact that women were divided, they fought toward the same goals. For this reason, they were able to capture the attention of politicians at the time. As a consequence, according to Hemmet (2007), issues pertaining to women became a political football. Different political parties supported political parties supported women equality so as to win their support. Subsequently, in 1903, the Russian Social Democratic Labor Party, which was the first Marxist political organization in Russia, incorporated the women rights (Turgenev, 1965). In fact, the Russian women achieved their full political and suffrage rights earlier than the North American and European counterparts (Hemmet, 2007).
Non-governmental organizations played a big role in fighting for women rights in Russia. However, it took the collaboration between Russian women and these organizations to fight for the rights of women and gender equality. In the 1990s, concepts of Western feminism made sense to a miniature group of men comprising of the highly educated women (Hemmet, 2007). Subsequently, the educated women spearheaded efforts to create a women’s movement. The women also played a role of liaising with foundations and also brought gendered interventions to Russia. Women used a number of avenues to raise their issues. They used journals to present to the country issues affecting them (Berlin, 2008).
They also used different forms of dissent writing like poetry and fiction through which they raised questions regarding official ideology (Berlin, 2008). Nonetheless, this form of writing was suppressed by imprisoning the editors. The editors were exiled to the West. This did not deter the efforts of the women. They still produced and accessed feminist material. Conversely, accessibility was only limited to scholars but not to the entire public (Hemmet, 2007). Accordingly, “feminism represented a vital way of reconnecting with progressive European thought and debates, through literature and personal connections. Indeed, for many scholars’ feminism and interest in women’s activism provided an opportunity to reexamine Russia’s role in European history’ (Hemmet, 2007, p.76).
Accordingly, through women movements, the women scholars were able to connect to the rest of the world. Additionally, they were able to compare the state of women rights in Russia to other countries. The women movement, Zhenskii Svet used education to empower women by putting up a Center for Women’s History and Gender Studies (Hemmet, 2007). They were able to do so through the help of local administrations and international foundations. The movement also fought staged a war against violence against women. The movement raised this issue to the international front and was able to catch the attention of the United Nations (Hemmet, 2007).
Even in the modern world, women are still at the frontline when it comes to fighting for a just, fair and peaceful society. They fight for transparency in the government and in political process like elections. For example, women staged a “pussy riot” which is to the arrest of three women. The women knew that the re-election was unfair leading to the return of Putin Vladimir for another term of presidency. The women went on the altar of Cathedral of Christ the Savior in Moscow and prayed for the exit of Putin as their president (Saval, 2012). When the women were brought to court, during their closing statement, it was expected that the women would apologize for their disgraceful acts. On the contrary, they aired their views and demanded for fair and just governance (Saval, 2012).
The Clergy and Social Reforms
The church has also played an important role in ensuring social reforms in Russia. The Russian Orthodox Church has been on the frontline with respect to responding to cultural, economic and social changes. Their response led to the transformation of Russia during the 19th and 20th centuries, the clergy reviewed their role, just like other members of the educated society (Radishchev, n.d). Accordingly, in the mid-19th century, Orthodox theologians commenced arguing that the church was bequeathed with the responsibility of fighting for the society as a whole and for individuals. The church was supposed to assert its mission by leading believers in building a society based on gospel principles of justice, charity, mercy and love (Berdiaev, 1994).
Activism in the Modern Russia
In the post soviet Moscow, the minority ethnic groups have had it a difficult time dealing with authorities. In the previous years, Moscow has positioned itself as a city with a multicultural image and as a city of internationalist and multinational Soviet Union. However, the city is marked with institutional prejudice characterized by an increase in the number of racially motivated crimes. Russia has failed to implement policies that promote cultural diversity (Stella, Queer space, Pride and shame in Moscow, 2013).
Gay and Lesbian Rights in Moscow
Moscow, the capital of Russia is one of the cities in Europe that does not tolerate gay and lesbianism. The city has for long been marked by homophobic violence. In fact Moscow Pride was banned a number of times by the Moscow authorities exhibiting the extent of institutionalization of homophobic prejudice in the country (Stella, 2013). Accordingly, the Moscow administration has exhibited reluctance with regard to promotion of multicultural diversity. Gays and lesbians form a sub-culture that had been denied accessibility to their rights in Russia. With respect to Stella (2013), Russian citizens have established “gay villages” as a way of legitimizing their queer presence in the public space in a country that prejudice against homosexuals (Stella, 2012). According to Stella (2012), those who fight for gay and lesbian rights have used Prides to collectively come to the open and claim these rights and to challenge the societal prejudice.
The plans with regard to organizing a gay Pride in Moscow emerged for the first time in 2005. The Pride has played a big role not just in Moscow but in the rest of Russia to fight for gay and lesbian rights. Some of the community organizations like Lesbian and Gay Archive have also played a role in fighting for the rights of this sub-culture. With reference to Stella (2013), lesbian club nights at the Disco Udar are used as tourist attractions for women who visit Moscow and other regions in the country. Thus, the women used a commercial activity to legitimize their presence in the country. Books have also been produced regarding lesbianism lading to a queer consumer culture but at the same time offering an opportunity through which women with the same mind can socialize. In accordance with Fierstein (2013), irrespective of the restrictions on the Moscow Pride and the conflicts it generates, the Lesbian, Gay Bisexual and Transgender (LGBT) community is still fighting for their public presence in rights in Russia. The Russian government has tried to control their activities by imposing strict regulations to exercise control and co-opt civil society. The LGBT community in Russia has managed to attract the attention of and huge support from the international community (Fierstein, 2013).
Environmental Activism
Another issue that has drawn the attention of the public in Russia is the environment. People want to live in a healthy environment and access resources. They also wish to protect the natural resources and secure them from being used by individuals for personal gains at the expense of the public. Accordingly, as reported by Nikitin (2011), a group of environmentalists temporarily stopped the construction of a superhighway. The superhighway was supposed to be constructed through the protected wilderness in Khimki forest located near Moscow. This led to launching of a website through which people could report all government deals that were suspicious (Nikitin, 2011). The website encompassed corporate documents which brought corrupt deals to light. Moreover, cased of misappropriation of government funds were highlighted on the site. Even though the government put the public in the dark by restricting state owned TV from availing the incidents to the public, these actions are a new wave of activism as argued by Nikitin (2011).
Conclusion
From exploration of the available literature, Russia has come a long as for as social reforms are concerned. Activism has played a big role in making Russia what it is today. Initially, the focus of the government was on the elite members of the society leaving out the peasants. Nevertheless, the peasant can access different services and a better quality of life as a consequence of activism. Unity is required in the country to stage activism that will be able to deter Russia from corruption.
References
Berdiaev, N. (1994). Philosophical Verity and Intelligentsia Truth. In N. Berdiaev, & S. Bulgakov, Vekhi: Landmarks (pp. 1-16). Armonk, NY: Sharpe.
Berlin, I. (2008). A Remarkable Decade: The Birth of the Russian Intelligentsia. In H. Hardy, & A. Kelly (Eds.), Russian Thinker (pp. 130-154). New York, NY: Penguin.
Fierstein, H. (2013, Jul 21). Russia’s Anti-Gay Crackdown. The New York Times. Retrieved from www.nytimes.com/2013/07/22/opinion/russias-anti-gay-crackdown.html?_r=0
Hemmet, J. (2007). Empowering Women in Russia: Activism, Aid, and NGOs. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
Nikitin, V. (2011, Jul 18). The Rebirth of Russian Civil Society. The Nation. Retrieved from http://www.thenation.com/article/162108/rebirth-russian-civil-society#.
Radishchev, A. (n.d). A Journey from St.Petersburg to Moscow Excerpts.
Raeff, M. (1966). The Impact of Western Ideas: In Origins of the Russian Intelligentsia: The Eighteenth-Century Nobility. New York, NY: Harvest/HBJ.
Saval, N. (2012, Aug 13). Pussy Riot Closing Statements. N+1. Retrieved from https://nplusonemag.com/online-only/online-only/pussy-riot-closing-statements./
Stella, F. (2012). The Politics of In/Visibility: Carving Out Queer Space in Ul’yanovsk. Europe-Asia Studies, 64(10), 1822-46.
Stella, F. (2013). Queer space, Pride and shame in Moscow. Slavic Review, 72(3), 458-80.
Struve, P. (1994). The Intelligentsia and Revolution. In S. Bulgakov, & N. Berdiaev, Vekhi: Landmarks (pp. 115-129). Armonk, NY: Sharpe.
Tolstoy, L. (1978). A.M. Kalmykova. In L. Tolstoy, Tolstoy Letters, Volume II: 1880-1910 (pp. 539-47). New York, NY: Charles Scribner’s Sons.
Turgenev, I. (1965). Hamlet and Don Quixote. Chicago Review, 17(4), 92-109.
Zubok, V. (2009). Zhivago’s Children: The Last Russian Intelligentsia. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvad University Press.
