Collective Action and Collective Violence in the Russian Labor Movement.pdf
-
Upload
hasbymarwahid777 -
Category
Documents
-
view
223 -
download
0
Transcript of Collective Action and Collective Violence in the Russian Labor Movement.pdf
-
8/10/2019 Collective Action and Collective Violence in the Russian Labor Movement.pdf
1/7
Collective Action and Collective Violence in the Russian Labor MovementAuthor(s): Diane KoenkerSource: Slavic Review, Vol. 41, No. 3 (Autumn, 1982), pp. 443-448Published by:Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2497017.
Accessed: 03/10/2014 00:02
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at.
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
.
Association for Slavic, East European, and Eurasian Studiesis collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve
and extend access to Slavic Review.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 152.118.24.10 on Fri, 3 Oct 2014 00:02:51 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/stable/2497017?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/2497017?origin=JSTOR-pdf -
8/10/2019 Collective Action and Collective Violence in the Russian Labor Movement.pdf
2/7
DIANE KOENKER
CollectiveAction nd CollectiveViolence
in the RussianLaborMovement
Historiansf theRussian abormovement ave been slowly hippingway t
the stereotypesboutRussianworkers reated y generationsf ntellectuals
quickto generalize rom ye-catchingmpressions.he resulthas been the
stereotyped,ipolarworkinglass.On the ne hand s the peasant okel who
toofrequentlyesorts o theviolent nd mindless ehavior ndigenouso his
original ural wamp.On the otherhand,we find he skilled rbanworker,
sometimes half-literatentellectual, ometimes laboraristocrat hodis-
dainsto cooperatewith
his
socialistmentors.' aniel Brower's ook at labor
violence ttempts o help reshape he familiar tereotype y exploring
he
cultural oots f theRussianworker's
redilection
or
iolence nd
by howing
thatsuch behavior s less mindless nd more political han ts critics
ave
accepted.By not adequately pecifying
he
contours nd especially
he fre-
quency
f
violence, owever,
e leavesus
ultimately
ith he
old
image
of
a
Pugachevshchinan the factories. rower
n
effect akes
the
pieces of
the
stereotypee has chipped way ndglues
hem ack n
approximately
he ame
pattern.
To clarifyheproblemfviolence,we must istinguishetween ollective
violence nd collectivection. ollectivection yworkersncludesmutual
id
funds, ooperatives,ob placement ureaus,
nd
political ction
s
well
as
strikesnd demonstrations.2ollective iolence
s
a subset fcollectivection,
and some
collective
ction
pills ver
nto
ollective iolence, sually
or ome
good reason.
For
nineteenth-century
estern
urope, Charles, ouise,
and
Richard illy fferomeprovocativeonclusions
bout
he ncidence
f
collec-
tiveviolence: 1) most ollective iolence
n
France, taly, nd Germany
e-
tween
830
and 1930
grew
ut of collective ctions hat
were
not
ntrinsically
violent; 2) violence esultedromesistanceya secondparty,ather han t
the utset f he ction; 3) thegreatmajorityf ollective
ctions
n
this
eriod
did not
nd
n
violence.3 ven
though
vidence bout
hesematterss far
more
problematic
orRussia han
or
Western
urope,
he
findingsy
the
Tillys ut
Brower's
onclusions
n
doubt.
The
most
mportantuestion
n
assessing
he o-called iolent
haracter
f
the
Russianworker
ertains
o the
frequency
fviolence. he
specific
ncidents
1. The language s from rinceSviatopolk-Mirskii
n 1902, quoted
in William H.
Chamberlin,
The Russian Revolution,vol. 1 (New York, 1965), p. 263. See also G. V. Plekhanov, Russkie
rabochie
v revoliutsionnomvizhenii,
n Sochineniia,vol.
3 (Moscow-Leningrad,
928). For
perti-
nent criticism
f theseviews, see,
for example,
Pamela Sears McKinsey,
From City Workers
to
Peasantry:
The Beginnings
f
the
RussianMovement
To
the People, '
Slavic Review, 38,
no.
4
(December 1979): 629-49
andAllan K. Wildman,
TheMaking of a
Workers'
Revolution Chicago,
1967).
2. Charles Tilly,
From Mobilizationto
RevolutionReading,
Mass., 1978), pp. 90-91.
3. Charles Tilly,
Louise Tilly, Richard
Tilly, TheRebellious Century,
830-1930 Cambridge,
Mass.,
1975), pp. 248-49.
This content downloaded from 152.118.24.10 on Fri, 3 Oct 2014 00:02:51 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp -
8/10/2019 Collective Action and Collective Violence in the Russian Labor Movement.pdf
3/7
444 Slavic
Review
of violence,ooting, nd destruction
id
occur, f course, ut udgments
s to
their ypicalityust est n the ontradictorytatementsfgovernmentbserv-
ers and disapproving
orkers. he
factorynspector vozdov
finds
iolence
infrequent;hegendarme oronov ays t s commonplace.4 completenu-
meration
fthe
ncidentsf
collectivection nd
collective iolence
would nd
ourdependence
n
such mpressions.
obert
Johnson, ho has made
a count
for
Moscow
rovinces thoroughly
s
his
ources
ermit, inds hat
hepropor-
tion
f
violence n
theMoscow egion
s
small.5
fail o
see the evidence
hat
Brower hinksuggestshat violence emained constantnlabor ctivityo
the end
of
the century.
Let us assume, owever,hatwe can determineith omeconfidencehe
relative requencyf labor violence n Russia. The nextstep is to specify
changingatternsnd to ook
for
nderlyingauses.
The
patterns
hat merge
will, s Brower uggests, rovide nsightnto he
mentalite
f Russianfactory
workersnd
others. rower uggests
hat
here s
a
distinguishable
ifference
between traditionalrotest
hich
ought tate nterventionnd a newer ype
of
protest
hich
irectly
ttacked
he
factoryystemnd,by xtension,apital-
ism.The distinction
ludes
me.The commonhread
fhis
xamples
ndofmost
laborprotest nown o me s the ontinuingxistence
fa
three-wayivision f
interestsmong abor,management,nd state.
s
it
true hatworkersought
state
id
against heir mployers
n
the1880s nd ater gnored
he tate
n favor
of
direct
ttacks n factories?
f
so, why
do the
police
become uch
popular
targets?heexamples rower ites uggest hat hefactoryystememained
target hroughout
he
period.
Where hen s a
change
n
consciousness?
To
use the vidence fcollective iolence ully, istorians ust igorously
examine he
pecifics
f
the xamples.What rovoked iolence
n
each
case?
n
the 1885 trike t the
Morozov actory,n orderly
ork
toppage uddenly
degenerated
nto
riot.Why? urely heriotersmust
ave
been responding
o
some action eitherby governmentpolice?) or management.
he specific
provocationmight xplain
he direction
nd scope
of the riot. One might
logicallyxpect iolence temmingrom isputes verwage ccountingo focus
on the
factoryookkeeper,
t the ocation f
theperceived
buse.6
One might
also expect spinners'trikepposedbythehigher aidweavers o resultn
violent
destruction
hat
would force he
weavers
o
strike oo.7 Careful
examination
ight
eveal
whether ussianviolencewas marked
y
wanton
destruction
r
whethert
showed he same
underlyingelectivity
nd relative
restrainthatE.
P.
Thompson
as found n
the
eighteenth-centurynglish
crowd.8
4. See Brower's note 5.
5. Robert Eugene Johnson, easant and Proletarian: he Working
lass of Moscow in theLate
Nineteenth entury New Brunswick,N.J., 1979).
6. See William M. Reddy, Skeins, Scales, Discounts, Steam,
and other Objects of Crowd
Justice
n
Early FrenchTextile Mills, Comparative tudies n Society
nd History, 1, no. 2 (April
1979): 204-13.
7. According to E. J. Hobsbawm, in England, wreckingwas
simply technique of trade
unionism n the period before, nd during he early phases of, the IndustrialRevolution Hobs-
bawm, Labouring Men [Garden City,N.Y., 1967], p. 11).
8.
E.
P.
Thompson,
The
Moral
Economy
of
the
English
Crowd n
the
EighteenthCentury,
Past
and Present,
no.
50 (February 1971):
76-136.
This content downloaded from 152.118.24.10 on Fri, 3 Oct 2014 00:02:51 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp -
8/10/2019 Collective Action and Collective Violence in the Russian Labor Movement.pdf
4/7
CollectiveAction, CollectiveViolence 445
When
the particulars
f these
ncidents
re
clarified,henperhaps he
patterns hat delineateworking-classonsciousness ill become clear. The
Tillys, orexample, ind enerallyhree ypes f collective iolence mong
workersn the nineteenthentury: ompetitiveamonggroups f workers),
reactivein defense frightsaken way), nd proactive to winnew ightsr
concessions).' he samecategoriesan apply o Russia.Workersnd peasants
indeed
ad
a tradition
f
fightingmong hemselves;his s notunique o Russia.
The widely eported ulachnyeoi parallel he raditionffightingmong ival
sectsof French
ompagnons
r
traveling
rtisans.'0
here
s no doubt
that
competitionmong roups
f
Russianworkers,ometimeseading o violence,
remained n importantource of tensionwell into the twentiethentury.
Reactive ollectivection and tsviolentubset)wasfarmore ommon venup
to
1917
han
many
bserversoncede.Most f hefew asesofworkers'eizure
of factoriesn 1917can be classified s defensive ction ntended o keep
factoriesnd
obs going.
would urther
uggest hat he ncidentsf
violence
toward oremen
ight
lso
representefensiveehavior ather han
hedawn-
ing fnew lass onsciousness.erhaps henew uthorityfforemenhallenged
an established
attern
f
powerwithin actories, hereworkwas performedy
teams
artels)
hired
by
worker-leaders.11
hus,
violence oward
upervisors,
while
mportant, as not necessarilyhe sign of class consciousness ewly
triumphant
r
of
proactive
ollectivection. uch
ollective
ction
may
have
provided
he
eedbed
or
he volution
f a new
onsciousness,
ut his volu-
tion roceeded yway f nteractionithhe deasof ntellectualsnd worker-
intellectuals.ecauseof his nteraction,ndnotbecause f he nnate ocialism
of the mir he workers ad left
behind,
he
consciousnessf
many
Russian
workers
as
by
1917
profoundlyocialist.'2
A further
reathatmust e clarifiedounderstandhemeaningf ollective
violence
n Russia s
the dentity
f
theparticipants.rower's nswer o the
question
s
nconclusive.ome
xamples
f
violence
ccurred
n
textile actories,
others
n
mines,
till
thers
n
metal
plants.
The
consensus f
contemporary
opinion
was that he rioters
were
peasantmigrants,isrupted
rom amiliar
village ife, youth
orn
way
from heir amilies. he
mage
f
theunwashed
peasant-workerarryinghe park f revolts a popular ne,but s supported
onlyby
circumstantialvidence.
Many
workers
eft heir
illages
o work
n
factories,
nd at the ame
time herewere
trikes, nrest,
nd
violence.'3
ut
howdo we know
hat he trikersnd
rioters ere hemost
prooted
orkers?
9. Tilly, Tilly,and Tilly,RebelliousCentury, p.
249-50.
10. Agricol erdiguier,
emoires 'un CompagnonMoulins, 914); William . Sewell,
Jr.,
Work nd Revolution n France:
The Language of Labor from heOld
Regime o 1848 (Cambridge,
1980),pp. 40-61.
11. There s a suggestionf this n HeatherHogan, Conciliationoards n
Revolutionary
Petrograd, ussianHistoryforthcoming).
12. GeorgeRude stresseshe
mportancef uch nteractionn
deology nd Popular rotest
(New York, 980).On consciousnessn 1917, ee Diane Koenker,
MoscowWorkersnd the 917
RevolutionPrinceton,981),pp.
362-64.
13. This iew s discussednKoenker, oscowWorkers,p. 44-45.
Early eportingf he 980
strikesn
the
Gdansk
hipyards
ade the same familiarlaim.
Gdansk mployedmanynew
migrants,hich ed to socialbreakdown
nd unrest. imilarly,abeling
ech Walesa an unem-
ployed
lectrician akes
im
eem muchmore ociallymarginalharacterhan orrectlyalling
him blacklistedlectrician.
This content downloaded from 152.118.24.10 on Fri, 3 Oct 2014 00:02:51 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp -
8/10/2019 Collective Action and Collective Violence in the Russian Labor Movement.pdf
5/7
446 Slavic Review
The vastbulk f empiricaltudies n
this
uestion,ncluding y wnwork n
1917 n Moscow, uggests hat ocial breakdown oes not ead to collective
violence, nd, n fact, he rioters sually urn ut to be the eastuprooted
membersf ociety.
4
Whenmigrant orkersid ngagencollectivection uch
as strikes,heywere bletomobilizeften ecause ftheir rior emliachestvo
ties.Theydid notrevolt ecause hey ad osttheir oots nd wereno longer
subject o social control.'5
Brower oncedes
his
point
aterwhenhe
identifiest least some of the
rebels as experienced orkers. t would be interestingo know,however,
whether ne type
of
workerwas disproportionatelynvolved
n
the violent
subset
f collective ction. et me
suggest
ome
possibilities.
f
it s
true hat
ruralmigrants
ere
disproportionatelynvolved
n
violence, henperhaps he
old theoriesbout ocialbreakdownnd anomie
ausing
evolutionre correct
after ll. If therioterss wellas collectivectivistsended o be more xperi-
enced
workers, rawing
n
traditional
atterns
f
protest
o articulate
ew
grievances,
hen
we must ookfor ther,more olitical xplanations
f
violence
and unrest.
n
the latter
part
of his
article,
Brower ndeed
suggests
hat
something
ike this s
at work: herewas
an
underlyingolitical ogiceven to
episodes
f
violence
n
Russian abor
history.
utuntilwe
have
pecific
nforma-
tion boutparticipantsnd nformationbout ollectiveiolencemonghema-
jority
f
Russianworkers
ho
were mployed
n
small
workshops
ather han
factories,
t will
be
difficulto characterize
his
iolence s classconsciousness.
Very mportanto Brower'sontentionfthe evolutionismnd conscious-
nessof abor
violence
s
thefact hat uchviolence ppears
o
have diminished
significantly
n
the
arly
wentieth
entury. lthough
omeworkersn
1917,
or
example,
ontinuedo hauloutunloved
upervisors
n
wheelbarrowsnddump
them
nceremoniously
n
unpleasantlaces,
hese ctsweremore
ymbolic
han
violent.
In fact,
cholarsnterested
n
the ultural
omponents
f
working-class
mentality ould
do
well
to
explore
he
origin nd symbolicmeaning f this
widespreadractice.)
More
ommonly,
orkersurnedo
organized rocedures
for
dealing
with hese
grievances: egotiations,rbitration,
trikes.'6
Why
id
violence
isappear?
art
f hereason
s
surely
etter
eporting
f
nonviolentncidents,utmyguess s thatworkersearned y experiencehat
violence
was
essentiallynproductive.
s workers
ained
ollective
xperience
in
the ndustrial
orld, hey
earned
o
use othermore
efficient,
ess
costly
methodso achieve
heir nds.
7
If
my
uess s
correct,
hen heworker-intellec-
tuals
ike
KanatchikovndBabushkin
ho
deplored
iolencewere
not
mposing
their wn dealisticiew
f
heworld
n their
omrades,
ut
were
n
fact
elping
to focus heir omrades'
nger
n more
realizable nd
permanentoals.
14. M. Tugan-Baranovskii ffers vidence thatyouthswere not torn from heirnative soil;
theyeagerlytraveledto jobs in the big cities Tugan-Baranovskii, usskaia fabrika
v
proshlom
nastoiashchem Moscow, 1922], p. 388). See also Tilly, Tilly, and Tilly, Rebellious Century,
pp. 251-52.
15. See Johnson, easant and Proletarian, p. 75-79 and Koenker, Moscow Workers, . 49.
16. The intensity f the grievances, as well as nonviolentways of articulating hem, are
admirably ocumented n Hogan, ConciliationBoards.
17. David
Snyder
nd WilliamR.
Kelly,
IndustrialViolence in
Italy, 1878-1903,
American
Journal of Sociology,82, no.
1
(1976): 131-62, report violent strikeswere
much
less likely to
succeed than nonviolent nes.
This content downloaded from 152.118.24.10 on Fri, 3 Oct 2014 00:02:51 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp -
8/10/2019 Collective Action and Collective Violence in the Russian Labor Movement.pdf
6/7
Collective
Action, CollectiveViolence
447
A
similar
isappearancefviolencenFrance nthe
nineteenthenturyas
been xplained y shiftn
the ormsf
organizationrom he ompagnonnage,
with tstraditionf ntraclassivalry,o the
mutual id society, ith'its radi-
tional ocus nsolidarity.18erhaps similarransitionnRussia way rom he
village-based
emliachestvaf factory
workers oward factory-basedr
community-centeredork
orce lso affectedhe haracterf
collectivection.
The
Guzhonmetal lantnMoscow, or
xample, ired tsworkers
hroughuch
villagenetworks,s did
mostfactories.n
the 1870s,Guzhonworkers ere
known o engage n
massbrawls n the ceof theMoscow iver
withworkers
from neighboring
extile actory,nd n he
1880s,Guzhonworkersesortedo
their
ists
o
settle rievances ithmanagers.
ut by 1905, erhaps ecause he
factory
abor
forcehad based
itselfmore
ecurely round he
factoryhan
around he
emliachestvo,
imilar
isputes ere ettled y trikesather
han y
violence.19rban ormsforganizationrobablyminimizedhedivisivenessf
zemliak
oyalties nd in so
doingpreparedworkers o engage n
types
of
collective ctionthat
requiredmore
planning
nd
cooperation. he more
urbanizedhework
orce, he essprevalent ould eviolentorms
f ollective
action.
The issueof labor
violence
s
an
important
ne
and deserves igorous
examination.
y
clarifying
he
ultural
nd
psychologicals
well
s the conomic
sources
f
Russianworkers'
onsciousness,
therssues an
be reconsidered.
or
example,
f
t can be
finally
etermined ho
n
factwas
contributing
o the
violence fthenineteenthenturynd why heseviolentmpulseswereredi-
rected n
other hannelsater
n,
we
might
e
able
to
udgethe
fficacy
f the
tsarist
overnment'sonurbanization
olicy
f
thenineteenth
entury.
overn-
ment
fficialsncouraged
he building f
factories
n
thecountrysideokeep
riot-proneeasant-workersrom ringing
heir iolence opoliticallyensitive
urban enters.
ssuminghat he
kind f
violence
rower escribes asmeasur-
ably
ess
frequent
n
cities,
here re at
east
hree
xplanations
or
ts bsence:
(1) the
city ivilizedmigrants
y offering
ther utlets or heir
nergiesthe
business f
daily ife, ommuting,averns,
lubs, chools,
ibraries);2)
the
ity
repressed iolence
with ts
high
oncentrationf
police; 3)
the
city
edirected
violentngerntorevolutionaryisciplineecauseoftheproximityf skilled
worker-leaders
nd
revolutionary
ntellectuals.or the
government,
hese hree
explanations
fferwo lternative
olicies.
ncouraging
rban ettlementould
either
ring
abor
peace
through
combinationf
repression
nd recreationr
endanger oliticaltability
ecause he
ity
rganized
orkerso mobilize heir
energies
ather han
dissipate
hem
n wild
orgies
f violence.
All thatwe
know boutworkers
n
1905
nd1917
uggests
hat t
was
ndeed
therole of the
city
s
organizer,
ot as concentratorf
violent
easants,
hat
produced
heurban evolution.his
uggests
hat he
government
newwhat t
was
doing
n
keeping
hose housandsf
peasant-workers
ut
n
Egorevsk
nd
Orekhovo-Zuevo.rom his erspective,heoutbreaksf aborviolence hat
18.
Ronald Aminzade, The Transformation
f
Social Solidarities n
Nineteenth-Century
Toulouse,
in John
M. Merriman, d., Consciousness nd Class Experience n
Nineteenth-Century
Europe (New York, 1979), pp. 85-105.
19. I. Belousov, UshedshaiaMoskva (Moscow, 1927?), p. 91; A. Gaisinovich,
Pervyi etap
rabochego dvizheniiana zavode 'Serp i Molot, ' Istoriiaproletariata SSR, vol. 6 (1931),
p. 159.
This content downloaded from 152.118.24.10 on Fri, 3 Oct 2014 00:02:51 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp -
8/10/2019 Collective Action and Collective Violence in the Russian Labor Movement.pdf
7/7
448
Slavic
Review
Brower escribes
might ave erved o
reinforceheconfidencef the
govern-
ment
n
itspolicy f dispersal.
These
commentsre
ntended o stresshe mportance
f a more ystem-
atic,ess mpressionistictudyf ollectivectionmong ussianworkersndto
suggest
hatwhere vidences scarce, osing
uestions ased
on
comparative
examples
an
prove
nstructive.t s notnecessarily
rue hat collective iolence
constitutesvidence f
profound ocial
stress. Labor violence
n Russian
factories,
hile
ntriguing,
oes not eflect
he
ompletendunchanging
harac-
ter
fthe
Russian
work orce nddraws
ttention
way
rom riticalssues
uch
as labor-management-state
elations,
orkplace elations,nd the
mpact f
urbanization.rower's uggestion
f
an
nnateworker adicalism
anifested
n
violence erves ltimately
o dress p oldBakuninist yths
bout he
power f
peasantbuntarstvo
n newcultural lothes.
This content downloaded from 152.118.24.10 on Fri, 3 Oct 2014 00:02:51 AM
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp