Forced reconstruction of Soviet society.
History [Crib] Fortunatov Vladimir Valentinovich
54. Alternatives of world development in the 20-30s. 20th century
In 1919–1946 acted The League of nations, an international organization whose charter has been signed by 45 states. This organization did a lot of useful things, but could not prevent a new war.
After the First World War, the leading countries after depression(1920–1923) and powerful rise(1924–1928) were amazed world economic crisis (1929–1933). The United States has taken the lead in the global economy. They paid off their debts and became the largest creditor themselves. In the USA, the achievements of science and technology were used, especially in the organization of labor (Fordism, Taylorism, etc.).
World economic crisis 1929–1933 intensified the search for ways to reorganize and modernize Western civilization.
From the 20s. in Denmark, Norway, Sweden began to form " Scandinavian socialism, which was based on a compromise between different segments of the population.
In the US President F. D. Roosevelt(since 1932) began to be carried out "new course". Conceptual framework domestic policy became "Keynesian revolution" the essence of which was to justify the need for active state intervention in the macroeconomic functioning of the market economy. Economist D. M. Keynes believed that the state should carry out large projects, increase the money supply and increase the aggregate demand of the population. The American president forced entrepreneurs to take on social obligations (unemployment benefits, cooperation with trade unions, etc.) for government orders. And saved America from revolution.
Germany, Italy and Japan are on the way militarization, external aggression and the establishment of total control within countries. The fascist regimes of A. Hitler and B. Mussolini also built roads, airfields, military factories, used social and national demagogy, but internal problems were supposed to be solved at the expense of "inferior races", capturing the resources of other countries. Jews were robbed and exterminated in Germany. By 1936, only 20 European countries Ah, there were 40 fascist parties and groups. Semi-fascist regimes were in Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia.
In France, Spain and Chile, in the fight against the threat of the Nazis coming to power, popular fronts, which were based on the communists and social democrats. Anti-Japanese National Front in 1936–1937 formed in China. The Nazis received a significant rebuff in England, Canada, the USA, Australia, Chile, Scandinavian and other countries. The main hopes for the defeat of fascism were associated with the USSR.
From the book Independent Ukraine. The collapse of the project author Kalashnikov MaximTough alternatives If the situation turns abruptly and the Russians get an early prospect of the emergence of NATO bases in Little Russia, then they will have to go for an extreme option - the split of the Svidomite state. And what is there? We have the right both to self-defence and to defend the rights of those
From the book Alternatives in the history of Russia author Shubin Alexander VladlenovichAlternatives Western Russia So, during the reign of Olga, Russia made two key choices that determined the development of the country for many centuries: the choice of the capital and the choice of faith. Other historical forks were not of such a fateful nature, and social inertia
authorChapter 4 Reformation - a turning point in European and world civilizational development § 19. Great geographical discoveries as a civilizational breakthrough People of the Renaissance type were distinguished by their willingness to take on the most difficult tasks. For Europeans with a fall
From the book History of World Civilizations author Fortunatov Vladimir ValentinovichSection 3 The birth of an industrial civilization and the contradictions of world development (XVIII - the first half
From the book History of World Civilizations author Fortunatov Vladimir ValentinovichSection 5 Alternatives and models of world development in the era of scientific and technological
From the book Course of the Age of Aquarius. Apocalypse or rebirth author Efimov Viktor AlekseevichChapter 8. The origins of the global financial and economic crisis and the methodological foundations for ensuring the sustainable functioning of the world economy Aces do not win in every game. K. Prutkov The economic crisis in the absence of natural disasters in the regional
From book German history author Patrushev Alexander IvanovichWERE THERE ALTERNATIVES? After the creation of the empire, it seemed superfluous to ask whether a single German state could arise, and if so, in the form in which it appeared. To the contemporaries of this event and to two succeeding generations, Bismarck's state seemed
From the book of the World cold war author Utkin Anatoly IvanovichThere is no alternative to the West Thus, two political wings have formed, pro et contra. On the pro-Western flank, Russia's natural sympathy for the Americans in their national tragedy has given renewed vigor to the debate about Russia's best course toward America. Society were
author Lobanov Mikhail Petrovich From the book Stalin in the memoirs of contemporaries and documents of the era author Lobanov Mikhail PetrovichStalin is against world domination and a new world order Question. How do you assess Churchill's last speech in the United States of America? Answer. I regard it as a dangerous act calculated to sow the seeds of discord among the allied
From the book Domestic History: Cheat Sheet author author unknown114. FEATURES OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE WORLD COMMUNITY IN THE XX century. The main feature of the development of human civilization in the XX century. was that for the first time in its existence, it was drawn into global, global wars and conflicts. The importance of this factor is not only
From the book Different Humanities author Burovsky Andrey MikhailovichGone are the days when Neanderthals were portrayed as ape-like savages who walked naked, lived in caves and ate raw meat. Neanderthals lived in an environment that cannot be inhabited without tools, dwellings, clothes. According to archaeological
From the book History of the Ukrainian SSR in ten volumes. Volume Nine author Team of authors3. PROSPECTS FOR SOCIO-ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. THE FOURTH FIVE-YEAR PLAN FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE NATIONAL ECONOMY
author Ponomarev M. V.Section VI Prospects and risks of world development in the era of globalization Issues of the section Historical essence of globalization and methodological problems of its study. Reasons for the acceleration of globalization at the end of the 20th century Information and media, technological,
From book Modern history author Ponomarev M. V.Seminar 17 Prospects and risks of world development in the era of globalization (class format: debates) The seminar is organized in the format of debates. Since the task is not of a game nature, students are invited to determine at the stage of preliminary preparation
From the 20s. XX century begins a new domestic psychology.
In pre-revolutionary psychology, the same tendencies were shared as in other countries.
In the early 20s. state-initiated restructuring of the sciences on the basis of Marxism. In 1922, Lenin's article "On the Significance of Militant Materialism" was published. The only true direction of philosophy is materialism. The most correct course of materialism is Marxism - dialectical materialism.
Chelpanov is the founder of the psychological institute. He did not like the idea of restructuring psychology on the basis of Marxism (see the book Brain and Soul. A Critique of Materialism and an Outline of Modern Scientific Ideas about the Soul). Considered dialectical materialism as close to Spinozism. That is closeness to monism.
Chelpanov after the Revolution says that psychology is an empirical science, which means that it does not depend on any philosophy, incl. from Marxism.
Kornilov after the Revolution collected quotes from various Marxists (not psychologists) and proclaimed the emergence of Marxist psychology. Kornilov began to write denunciations against Chelpanov. In November 1923, Chelpanov was fired. Following him, almost all the other employees quit. Kornilov becomes head of the institute. Starts hiring new employees. A 5th year student A.N. Leontiev. Kornilov invites Kazan University student A.R. Luria, after graduating from the university, to become the scientific secretary of the psychological institute. Then he sends him instead of himself to the congress of neurologists. There Luria meets L.S. Vygotsky and contacts Kornilov to invite him to the institute. In 1924 Vygotsky moved to Moscow.
Kornilov's report "Psychology and Marxism" at the First All-Russian Congress on Psychoneurology (1923) marked the beginning of the officially supported process of restructuring psychology on the basis of Marxism.
Development of psychotechnics
Isaac Naftulovich Shpilrein (1869-1937)
Solomno G. Gellershtein (1896-1967)
In 1921, at the direction of Lenin, the Central Institute of Labor was created
Numerous laboratories and institutes dealing with psychotechnics for various departments are being opened.
ON THE. Bernstein (1896-1966) put forward a biomechanical program for the study of movements in the labor process. These studies became the foundation of the concept of building movements and the physiology of activity.
The trend towards separation of Soviet psychotechnics from foreign research. In the articles by I.N. Spielrein "On the Turn in Psychotechnics" and "On the Question of the Theory of Psychotechnics" (1931) contrasting bourgeois and Soviet psychotechnics.
Education and upbringing
Pedology is the new science of childhood covering all aspects of child development.
In 1928, the official regulation "On holding a mass practical work on a comprehensive study of childhood, developed jointly by the People's Commissariat for Education and the People's Commissariat for Health of the RSFSR.
In 1928-1932. the journal "Pedology" was published (editor-in-chief A.B. Zalkind).
Theoretical work
Until 1922, the Moscow Psychological Society operated. Research continued at the school of G.I. Chelpanov. at the Moscow Psychological Institute.
S.V. Kravkov - "Self-observation" (1924), "Suggestion. Essay on psychology and pedagogy" (1924), "Essay on psychology" (1925).
In 1923 A.A. Ukhtomsky (1875-1942) came out with the doctrine of the dominant.
V.N. Ivanovsky - "Methodological introduction to science and philosophy" (1923).
Active dissemination of foreign works. Translations were supplied with detailed introductory articles.
1922 - creation of the "Russian Psychoanalytic Society" (I.D. Ermakov). Analytical circles in different cities.
On January 10-15, 1923, the First All-Russian Congress on Psychoneurology was held in Moscow. Chairman - A.P. Nechaev, honorary chairman - V.M. Bukhterev.
Since 1928, the journal "Psychology, Pedology and Psychotechnics" began to appear
Behavioral concepts
M.Ya. Basov (1892-1931) - ideas of activity in psychology and ideas about its structure ("General foundations of pedology No., 1931)
P.P. Blonsky (1884-1941) - "Reform of Science" (1920) - scientific psychology is the science of behavior.
Blonsky - application of the principle of development to the analysis of the psyche. Blonsky's theory of memory. The types of memory are compared with the stages of its formation in ontogeny. Motor memory - emotional memory - figurative memory - logical memory.
Blonsky collaborated with Krupskaya, held a public position in the People's Commissariat of Education.
There were no serious repressions after 1936 against him,
Reflexology V.M. Bekhterev (1857-1927)
In the 20s. his student N.M. Shchelovanov creates the Development Department of the Institute for the Study of the Brain.
"Collective reflexology" Bekhterev (1921).
Reflexological discussion in 1929. Criticism of Bekhterev.
Reactology K.N. Kornilov (1879-1957)
The subject of study is reactions. The reaction consists of an external influence, a central (subjective) component and a response.
Psychology of consciousness - thesis
Behaviorism is the antithesis
Dialectical synthesis - reactology (the beginning and end of the reaction and subjectively the central component are studied objectively).
Unipolar waste of energy. If it is spent in the center - thinking, if on the periphery - motor skills. That is, there is a reciprocal relationship between thinking and motor skills.
Georgian school in psychology
Psychology of D.N. Uznadze (1886-1950)
Creation of the Society of Psychologists of Georgia (1927)
NEP: basic principles and meaning. The policy of "war communism" led the country to a crisis. The consequences of "war communism" were the bureaucratization of state administration, the weakening of the workers' interest in the results of their labor, the famine of 1921-1922. In March 1921, the Tenth Congress of the RCP(b) adopted a decision on the transition to the New Economic Policy (NEP). The main principles of the NEP were the replacement of surplus appropriation with a tax in kind, commodity production, permission for private trade, economic methods of management, material incentives for work, self-financing, a diversified economy, the transfer of small enterprises to private hands, and the permission of hired labor. The main structures were socialist (state enterprises), state-capitalist (state enterprises leased to private entrepreneurs), private capitalist (small private enterprises that used hired labor), small-scale commodity (peasant farms and craft workshops based on the labor of the owner himself and his family). All large enterprises belonged to the state. They were united in trusts and syndicates. The purpose of this measure was to facilitate the centralized management of industrial enterprises and eliminate competition between them. Private capital predominated in the service and retail sectors. Foreign concessions are not widely used. See Civil war and military intervention in the USSR. pp. 156, 394. The transition from “war communism” to the NEP meant a transition from war to peace, from emergency methods of management to normal ones. The question of the nature of the new economic policy is debatable. Some historians consider it a forced, temporary retreat from the principles of "war communism", while others consider it a special model of socialism. The New Economic Policy contributed to the economic recovery and made it possible to quickly restore the national economy. However, the fear of the revival of capitalism did not allow the full use of the creative potential of the NEP. The state artificially restrained the development of prosperous peasant farms. The lack of competition between state enterprises with free pricing led to a discrepancy between prices for agricultural and industrial products, an increase in prices for essential goods and a marketing crisis in 1923. Economic freedom was not combined with political freedom. Repressions against dissidents continued after the civil war. In 1921, on trumped-up charges of organizing a conspiracy against the Soviet government, professors V. N. Tagantsev, Tikhvinsky, Lazarevsky and the poet N. S. Gumilyov. See Sorokin P. A. Long road. P. 137. The first demonstrative falsified trial was the trial of the Socialist-Revolutionaries on June 8 - August 7, 1922. They were accused of preparing terrorist acts against the Soviet government, in cooperation with the Cadets and the Entente. Almost none of the defendants pleaded guilty. The court did not have any evidence of their guilt. Cooperation between the Socialist-Revolutionaries and the Cadets could not be blamed on either party, since this is not a crime, but normal political practice. It was the first political trial after the adoption of the first Soviet criminal code. The defendants were charged with actions committed during the years of the civil war, that is, before its adoption. Consequently, one of the most important principles of law was violated: "The law has no retroactive effect." However, the court sentenced all defendants to death with a suspended sentence for an indefinite period. See Solzhenitsyn A.I. The Gulag Archipelago. // Op. in 7 vols. T. 5. S. 255 - 266. In the same year, 500 scientists were sent abroad. See Solzhenitsyn A.I. The Gulag Archipelago. T. 5. S. 269. The above examples show that the laws were not always respected. The real power belonged not to the soviets, but to the party committees. This did not allow the full use of the possibilities of the NEP and led to its liquidation. The new economic policy was in line with the interests of the peasants, the intelligentsia, small entrepreneurs, and skilled workers, but was contrary to the interests of the bureaucracy. The influence of the NEP on agriculture and the life of the peasants was beneficial. The negative aspects of the New Economic Policy were explained by its inconsistency.
Education of the USSR. The question of relations between the Soviet republics was first considered in 1919 at the VIII Congress of the RCP(b). V. I. Lenin insisted on recognizing the right of nations to self-determination and creating a federation of equal states. JV Stalin proposed to include all the Soviet republics in Russia on the basis of autonomy. After the end of the civil war, it was necessary to regulate relations between Russia and other Soviet republics that had arisen on the territory Russian Empire, and the discussion, which began in 1919, resumed. It was complicated by the conflict between the Transcaucasian Regional Committee of the RCP(b) and the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Georgia. Its reason was the disagreement on the issue of Georgia's entry into a federal state. JV Stalin and GK Ordzhonikidze insisted that Georgia join the USSR as part of the Transcaucasian Federation. B. Mdivani and F. I. Makharadze sought Georgia's entry into the Soviet Union as an independent republic. This conflict went down in history as the “Georgian affair”. V. I. Lenin took the side of the Georgian communists. By the end of 1922, the point of view of V. I. Lenin won, and on December 30, 1922, the First All-Union Congress of Soviets proclaimed the formation of the USSR. The Union Treaty provided for the right of each republic to secede from the Union. See First Soviet Government. pp. 250 - 259. Thus, the basis of the USSR was the contradiction between the right of nations to self-determination and the unity of the state. The Russian people were placed in a worse position than other peoples. The policy of the Union government was contrary to the interests of the Russian people. This led to the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991.
Industrialization. In the mid 20s. was the question of further development country, above all, the completion of industrialization. It sparked an internal party discussion that combined disputes over methods of industrialization with power struggles. L. D. Trotsky advocated the accelerated development of heavy industry, the withdrawal of funds from the peasants, and the widespread use of non-economic coercion. N. I. Bukharin proposed to carry out industrialization within the framework of the NEP and to develop mainly light industry in order to direct the proceeds from the sale of consumer goods to the peasants for the development of heavy industry. This path of industrialization was longer, but allowed to avoid social upheavals and create a self-regulating economy. The main results of the intra-party struggle in the second half of the 20s. were the establishment of the personal dictatorship of I. V. Stalin and the adoption of the industrialization plan proposed by L. D. Trotsky. The conflict between L. D. Trotsky and G. E. Zinoviev on the one hand and I. V. Stalin on the other was caused, firstly, by the struggle for power, and secondly, by disagreements over the timing of events that all participants discussions were deemed necessary. The beginning of industrialization is considered to be 1928, since in that year the first five-year plan for the development of the national economy was adopted, drawn up under the leadership of the Chairman of the Supreme Council of National Economy V. V. Kuibyshev and the Chairman of the State Planning Commission G. M. Krzhizhanovsky. The plan provided for the accelerated development of heavy industry and high rates of production growth, but it was feasible. However, at the insistence of I.V. Stalin, the plan was revised several times, the slogan was put forward: “5-year plan in 4 years”, as a result of which not only the new plan was not fulfilled, but also the original, more realistic one. During the years of the first five-year plans, Rostselmash, tractor factories in Stalingrad and Chelyabinsk, the Magnitogorsk Iron and Steel Works, the DneproGES, and the Turkestan-Siberian Railway (Turksib) were built. Manual labor prevailed at construction sites, the builders were not always provided with housing, the labor of prisoners was widely used. Industrialization according to the plan of L. D. Trotsky and I. V. Stalin led to a disproportion between heavy and light industry, to an increase in the share of raw materials industries and, consequently, unskilled labor, to the massive use of forced labor and the creation of a system incapable of independent development. The machine tool industry lagged behind other industries, which adversely affected the production of military equipment on the eve of the Great Patriotic War.
Collectivization Agriculture . The adopted industrialization plan provided for the forced collectivization of agriculture. During the years of the NEP, a repressive apparatus was created that was capable of crushing the resistance of the peasants. The first collective farms appeared in 1927. They were created on a voluntary basis. Until 1928, peasants sold their produce to the state at market prices. The grain procurement crisis in 1928 was caused by a shortage of grain for export abroad in exchange for industrial equipment, artificial restraint on the development of prosperous peasant farms, low procurement prices, and a shortage of manufactured goods for sale to the peasants. The lack of manufactured goods was explained by the rapid development of heavy industry to the detriment of light industry. In 1927 - 1928. the state limited the right of collective farms to sell their products on the market. In 1927 - 1929 grain procurements were carried out by violent methods. JV Stalin used the crisis of 1928 as a pretext for the forced collectivization of agriculture. Its goal was, in fact, the gratuitous seizure of all marketable products from the peasants. The means of achieving this goal was to be a direct exchange of products between the city and the countryside. The ratio of prices for industrial and agricultural products was established by the state. State prices for grain were 8-10 times lower than market prices. In August 1929, the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks adopted a resolution on the seizure of all surpluses from the peasants. The resolution of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks, adopted in November of the same year, provided for the complete collectivization of agriculture and direct product exchange between town and countryside. On January 5, 1930, the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks adopted a resolution "On the pace of collectivization." It provided for the completion of complete collectivization in the main grain-growing regions in the spring of 1931, in most of the territory of our country in the spring of 1932, in the most backward regions in 1933. It was impossible to fulfill this decree without violence against the peasants. 15% of the peasants were dispossessed and exiled to the North, 20% were deprived of political rights. In some collective farms, even poultry was socialized. The peasants responded to forced collectivization with mass demonstrations. In 1929 there were 1300 peasant uprisings, in 1930 - more than 2000. The answer to these speeches was an article by I. V. Stalin "Dizziness from success", published on March 2, 1930 in Pravda. In fact, he shifted the responsibility to the performers. In January 1930, 20% of the peasants were in the collective farms, in March 1930 - 50%. The increase in the grain procurement plan outpaced the growth in grain production. In 1928, the grain harvest amounted to 73.32 million tons, in 1930 - 83.54 million tons. The grain procurement plan in 1928 was 10.79 million tons, in 1930 - 22, 13 million tons. Thus, grain production increased by 13.94%, and the grain procurement plan - by 105.2%. The marketability of agriculture increased from 14.7% to 26.7%, but not due to an increase in production, but due to a reduction in grain consumption within the economy. See Oskolkov EN Famine 1932 / 1933. Rostov-on-Don, 1991. P. 9 - 13. Fulfillment of the state grain procurement plan was declared the "first commandment" of the Soviet peasantry. The forced seizure of bread at low prices aroused the resistance of the peasants. They defended their right to life. However, the party leadership regarded spontaneous peasant uprisings and passive resistance as "kulak sabotage" and did not reduce, but increased the grain procurement plan, especially in the Cossack regions. The sale of grain to private individuals was prohibited. Collective farms that did not fulfill the grain procurement plan were even seized of seed grain. This was done on the personal instructions of I. V. Stalin and L. M. Kaganovich. The shortage of grain for workdays led to the replacement of piecework wages by equalizing wages, which led to a sharp decline in labor discipline and quality of field work. Crop rotation rules were violated on many collective farms. So, in the Volga region, wheat was sown in the same place for 5-7 years in a row. The load per 1 draft unit increased from 6.3 hectares in 1928 to 10.4 hectares in 1932. In 1931, the harvest amounted to 69.48 million tons, and the grain procurement plan - 25.55 million tons, that is, 36.77% of the gross grain harvest. The impracticable grain procurement plan and the violent methods of carrying it out aroused the resistance of the peasants. They no longer dared to open uprisings, but evaded the implementation of an unbearable plan, they hid grain. Therefore, on August 7, 1932, the Central Executive Committee and the Council of People's Commissars of the USSR issued a resolution "On the protection of property of state enterprises, collective farms and cooperation and the strengthening of public property." It provided for execution for theft of state or collective farm property, regardless of its quantity. Under extenuating circumstances, execution was replaced by 10 years in prison. In 5 months, 76,961 people were convicted under this law in Russia, 2,588 of them were shot, 49,360 were sentenced to 10 years in prison. See Danilov V.P., Zelenin I.E. Organized famine. To the 70th anniversary of the all-peasant tragedy. // National history. 2004. No. 5. pp. 97 - 109, 22 - 23. In the village of Vyoshenskaya, the purveyors destroyed houses, drove the peasants out into the cold, and tortured them. About 3,000 collective farmers were arrested, 1,200 families were evicted from their homes, potatoes and livestock were taken away from 3,500 families. Collective farms that did not fulfill the grain procurement plan were entered on the “black board”, that is, any trade was prohibited in them. 2 Don and 13 Kuban villages were listed on the "black board". In 1932, the inhabitants of several Kuban villages were evicted to the North. By the beginning of 1933, 63,500 residents of the Cossack regions were deported. Denunciations were encouraged against those who hid bread: the scammer received 10-15% of the selected grain. Thus, the collectivization of agriculture made it possible to increase state grain procurements, but not by increasing labor productivity, but by withdrawing grain from the peasants. This led to the famine of 1932-1933. See Oskolkov E. N. Famine 1932/1933. pp. 66 - 67. In many villages in southern Russia, famine began as early as 1931. Its causes were also violations of the rules of agricultural technology and a lack of draft power. In February 1932, the 17th Conference of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks condemned attempts to switch to direct product exchange. In May 1932, the collective farms received the right to sell their products on the market. The grain procurement plan was reduced by 100,000 tons. But these measures were taken too late. Due to the reduction of sown areas, poor quality of field work and unfavorable natural conditions in 1932, about 2 times less grain was harvested than in 1931, so the new plan also turned out to be unfeasible. On September 23, 1932, the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks and the Council of People's Commissars of the USSR decided to refuse seed loans to collective farms. Grain procurement was carried out by the same methods. Not only grain was taken from the peasants, but also baked bread. The peasants tried to leave the areas engulfed by famine, but the police and the OGPU detained them. To this end, in 1932, was introduced passport system. See Danilov V.P., Zelenin I.E. Organized famine. To the 70th anniversary of the all-peasant tragedy. Oskolkov E. N. Famine 1932/1933. Entire families died of hunger. About 6 million people died in Ukraine, 1 million in the Volga region, 8 million in the whole country. From autumn 1932 to April 1933, the population of the USSR decreased from 165.7 million to 158 million, then there are 7.7 million. See Danilov V.P., Zelenin I.E. Organized famine. To the 70th anniversary of the all-peasant tragedy. In total, 18.4 million people died between 1929 and 1933. In 1937 collectivization was completed. According to A. B. Suslov, “the true goal of the Stalinist agrarian policy in the early 1930s. was the destruction of the peasantry as a class. See Suslov A. B. Special contingent and forced labor in Soviet penitentiary concepts of the 1930s. // National history. 2004. No. 5. S. 84.
Establishment totalitarian regime in the USSR. At the turn of the 20s - 30s. A new wave of repressions began in the Soviet Union. They became possible because during the years of the civil war an apparatus of violence was created, a one-party system was formed, the civil war accustomed society to violence. The first open political trials after 1922 were the Shakhty case, the trials of the Industrial Party and the Union Bureau of the Mensheviks. The Shakhty case was considered from May 18 to July 15, 1928. The defendants were mining engineers. They were accused of sabotage. Of the 53 defendants, 24 pleaded not guilty. There was no evidence against them. Nevertheless, the court pronounced a guilty verdict on all. In 1930, agrarian economists A. V. Chayanov and N. D. Kondratiev were arrested. They were accused of creating the Labor Peasant Party and exiled to Siberia without trial. In 1937 they were shot. In 1929 - 1930. the "case of the academicians" was fabricated. The main defendants were the historians S. F. Platonov, N. S. Likhachev, E. V. Tarle, A. I. Zaozersky, and L. V. Cherepnin. All of them were administratively expelled from Moscow. The case was not brought to court. In 1933, all the accused were released, but S.F. Platonov died in exile the same year. See Kozhinov V. V. Russia. Century XX (1901 - 1939). M., 2002. From November 25 to December 7, 1930, the case of the Industrial Party was considered. The main accused - engineers P. A. Palchinsky, A. F. Velichko, N. K. von Meck - refused to plead guilty and died in prison. 8 people appeared before the court - engineers from various industries. They were also accused of wrecking and preparing foreign intervention. The accusation was based only on the forced confessions of the defendants, primarily L. K. Ramzin. The court did not have any documents. During the trial, it turned out that the accusation was completely unfounded. However, the court sentenced all defendants to 10 years in prison. See Solzhenitsyn A.I. The Gulag Archipelago. V. 5. S. 271 - 286. March 1 - 9, 1931, the process of the Allied Bureau of the Mensheviks took place. See ibid. pp. 286 - 292. In the course of these processes, the falsification methods used in 1936 - 1938 were worked out. On December 5, 1936, a new constitution of the USSR was adopted. It proclaimed basic civil rights and freedoms, for the first time in the Soviet Union, universal, direct, equal suffrage by secret ballot was introduced. However, in practice, the constitution was not respected and did not stop the arbitrariness of the punitive authorities. The reason for a new wave of repression was the murder of S. M. Kirov on December 1, 1934. In 1935, G. E. Zinoviev and L. B. Kamenev were arrested. They were involved in the repressions of the 20s. Thus, from that time on, those who created the apparatus of violence became victims of repression. In 1936 they were sentenced to be shot. On June 11, 1937, a trial was held in the case of military leaders: M. N. Tukhachevsky, V. M. Primakov, I. P. Uborevich, R. P. Eideman, V. K. Putna, A. I. Kork, I. E. Yakira, B. M. Feldman. All of them were sentenced to death and shot the next day. On July 2, 1937, the Politburo of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks decided on mass repressions against former kulaks who had returned from exile. The order of the People's Commissar of Internal Affairs N.I. Yezhov dated July 30, 1937 established for each Union republic, region, territory the number of persons to be shot or imprisoned. Sentences were passed by the so-called "troikas" - extrajudicial punitive bodies, the composition of which was determined by the same order. On August 5, 1937, mass arrests of the dispossessed, participants in peasant uprisings, and members of opposition parties began. In March 1938, N. I. Bukharin, A. I. Rykov, and Kh. G. Rakovsky were tried. All defendants were sentenced to death. According to V.V. Kozhinov, in 1937 - 1938. 1,344,923 people were repressed, according to A. B. Suslov - 1,344,950 people, of which 681,692 were shot. In total, 9.6 million people died from 1934 to 1938. See Kozhinov V. V. Russia. Century XX. (1901 - 1939). M., 2002. On June 26, 1940, the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR issued a decree on criminal liability for absenteeism and unauthorized departure from work. According to A. B. Suslov, the purpose of mass repressions was not only the suppression of the opposition, but also the use of forced labor of prisoners, which testified to the archaization of society. See Suslov A. B. Special contingent and forced labor in Soviet penitentiary concepts of the 1930s. One of the reasons for the establishment of a totalitarian regime in the USSR was the incompleteness of the modernization of society.
Culture of the 20s - 30s The policy of the Soviet government in the field of culture was ambivalent. On the one hand, it sought to eradicate illiteracy and provide as many citizens as possible with access to education and cultural values. On the other hand, culture was placed under strict party control, any dissent was suppressed, the quality of education dropped sharply compared to the beginning of the 20th century. The autonomy of universities was abolished. In 1919, in higher educational institutions workers' faculties (workers' faculties) were created for working youth who did not have a secondary education. For young people from intelligent families, access to higher education limited. In schools, history was replaced by social science, and history departments were closed in universities. A centralized state system of accounting and protection was created cultural property , but the organized export of works of art abroad caused great damage to Russian culture. Atheistic propaganda was an important part of the cultural policy of the Soviet government. However, the popularization of scientific discoveries that refute the religious picture of the world was replaced by violence against believers and the massive destruction of churches, among which there were many monuments of Russian architecture. Therefore, in contrast to the spontaneous process of secularization of culture, which began as early as the 17th century, the anti-church campaign of the late 20s and early 30s. brought domestic culture not good, but harm. Historical science was dominated by the concept of M. N. Pokrovsky, based on the nihilistic denial of the pre-revolutionary history of Russia. However, the development of historical science did not stop. The greatest successes were achieved in archeology, especially in the study of early Slavic cultures - Zarubinets, Chernyakhov, Penkovskaya. The main attention was paid to the history of the revolutionary movement. In the 20s. the first works of M. V. Nechkina about the Decembrists were published. Discussion of the problems of the history of revolutionary populism before 1934-1935. was relatively free. Along with the Marxist concept, based on the statements of V. I. Lenin, there was a populist one. In 1929 - 1931. a discussion on populism took place, timed to coincide with the 50th anniversary of the "Narodnaya Volya". On June 14, 1935, the resolution of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks “On propaganda work in the near future” was adopted. After that, the study of populism actually ceased until the mid-1950s. In 1934, the teaching of history was resumed in schools, and the history faculties were restored in universities. The main achievements in the natural sciences were the studies of N. E. Zhukovsky, K. E. Tsiolkovsky, I. P. Pavlov, N. I. Vavilov. However, in the 30s. genetics was actually banned, N. I. Vavilov was arrested and in 1943 he died in prison. The main theme in the art of 20 - 30-ies. There was a revolution and a civil war. The attitude of the Russian intelligentsia to the revolution of 1917 was ambiguous. I. A. Bunin, A. I. Kuprin, M. I. Tsvetaeva did not accept her and went abroad. I. A. Bunin expressed his attitude to the revolution in the book Cursed Days. A. A. Blok, V. Ya. Bryusov, S. A. Yesenin, M. A. Bulgakov, A. A. Akhmatova remained in Russia. A. A. Blok and S. A. Yesenin accepted the revolution, although not unconditionally. A. A. Blok expressed his attitude towards her in the poems “The Twelve” and “Scythians”, S. A. Yesenin - in the poems “Anna Snegina” and “Sorokoust”, in the poems “Russia is leaving” and “Soviet Russia”. M. A. Bulgakov belonged to Soviet power rather negatively than positively, and expressed his opinion about it in the stories "White Guard" and "Heart of a Dog". The attitude of the intelligentsia to the revolution was shown by A. N. Tolstoy in the novel "Walking through the torments". civil war on the Don, the tragedy of the Cossacks was portrayed by M. A. Sholokhov in the novel Quiet Don. The most talented of the official Soviet writers were A. M. Gorky and V. V. Mayakovsky. Until the mid 30s. There were various trends and associations of writers in literature. In 1934, on the initiative of A. M. Gorky, they were united into the Writers' Union of the USSR. The Union of Writers did not so much promote as hinder the development of literature, as it limited the freedom of creativity and served not as a means of protecting writers, but as an instrument of party control over them. The best Soviet composers were N. Ya. Myaskovsky, S. S. Prokofiev, D. D. Shostakovich, the best composers of Russian abroad were S. V. Rakhmaninov, A. N. Skryabin, I. I. Stravinsky. The dominant trend in architecture was constructivism. Its most famous representatives are the Vesnin brothers. The representatives of realism in theatrical art were K. S. Stanislavsky and V. I. Nemirovich-Danchenko, the representative of the avant-garde was V. E. Meyerhold. A bright, original phenomenon in theatrical art was the theater of E. B. Vakhtangov. In the 30s. sound films appeared. The first sound film was "The Road to Life". The most famous films of the 20 - 30-ies. - “Battleship Potemkin”, “Chapaev”, “Alexander Nevsky”.
The foreign policy of the USSR in the 20-30s. USSR on the eve of the Great Patriotic War. The 1920s are called “a strip of confessions” in Russian literature, since diplomatic relations were restored at that time Soviet Russia With foreign countries. On April 10 - May 19, 1922, the Genoese Conference took place. Representatives of Great Britain and France demanded the recognition of the debts of the tsarist and Provisional governments, the return of nationalized enterprises to foreigners and the abolition of the monopoly of foreign trade. The Soviet delegation agreed to pay off pre-war debts and grant concessions to the former owners of the nationalized enterprises, on the condition that the war debts be canceled, the damage caused by foreign intervention be compensated, and the Soviet government recognized. No agreement was reached on these issues, but the international isolation of our country was overcome. On April 16, in the suburb of Genoa, Rapallo, a Soviet-German agreement was concluded on the restoration of diplomatic relations and economic cooperation. On January 30, 1933, the Nazis won the parliamentary elections in Germany, and President P. Hindenburg appointed A. Hitler as Chancellor. War between the Soviet Union and Germany became inevitable. This forced the Soviet government to stop military cooperation with Germany and discredit the pre-revolutionary history of Russia. In 1934 the USSR joined the League of Nations. In 1935, collective security treaties were concluded with Czechoslovakia, France and the Baltic countries. The best samples of Soviet military equipment surpassed their German counterparts in their combat qualities. In 1938, the heavy tank KV, created by N. L. Dukhov and Zh. Ya. Kotin, was tested. The new tank had a diesel engine, more reliable and safer than a gasoline engine, 100 mm frontal and 75 mm side armor, a 76 mm cannon and 3 machine guns, and was 7.5 tons lighter than the SKM, the main heavy tank adopted on weapons in Soviet army. In March 1940, tests of the medium tank T-34, created by M. I. Koshkin, took place in the Kremlin. The T-34, like the KV, was equipped with a diesel engine and a 76 mm cannon, the armor thickness reached 45 mm, the armor plates were located obliquely, which made the tank less vulnerable. Both the T-34 and the KV had a tracked undercarriage, which increased their cross-country capability. See Vetrov A. A. Unsurpassed "thirty-four". // Questions of history. 1982. No. 5. pp. 89 - 100. The new Soviet aircraft surpassed the German ones in speed and maneuverability. But in 1941, obsolete tanks and aircraft prevailed, significantly inferior to the German ones. Mass production T-34 tanks began only in September 1940. The reasons for this were unsatisfactory supplies, insufficient equipment productivity, and the fact that, along with the latest tanks, the production of obsolete ones continued at the same factories. The re-equipment of aviation units began only in 1941. In 1940, only 64 Yak-1 fighters, 20 MiG-3 fighters and 2 Pe-2 dive bombers were produced, in the first half of 1941 - 1946 MiG-3, Yak- 1, LAGG-3, 458 Pe-2 bombers and 249 IL-2 attack aircraft. See Yakovlev A.S. The purpose of life. M., 1974. S. 223. According to A.I. Todorsky, in 1937 - 1938. 3 out of 5 marshals, 3 out of 5 commanders of the 1st rank, 10 out of 10 commanders of the 2nd rank, 50 out of 57 commanders, 154 out of 186 commanders were repressed. From 1938 to 1940, the number of officers with a higher military education decreased from 7.9% to 6.7%, with a secondary military education - from 37.3% to 36%. The number of officers with short-term training increased from 44% to 47%. See Danilov VD Soviet High Command on the eve of the Great Patriotic War. // New and recent history. 1988. No. 6. pp. 3 - 21. Therefore, the governments of England and France did not consider the Red Army significant military force. At the same time, they sought to direct German aggression against the Soviet Union. On September 30, 1938, they concluded an agreement with A. Hitler, which provided for the annexation of the Sudetenland of Czechoslovakia to Germany. On October 1, 1938, German troops invaded Czechoslovakia and in March 1939 completely occupied it. Under these conditions, on August 23, 1939, the Soviet government concluded a non-aggression pact with Germany for 10 years, and on September 28, 1939, an agreement on friendship and borders. The western border of the USSR established by this treaty was fair, but the treaty of friendship with Nazi Germany was just as gross a political mistake as the Munich treaty of September 30, 1938. A. Hitler was not going to comply with any international treaties, and perceived any concessions as a sign of weakness . The policy of appeasing the aggressor, pursued by all countries that subsequently joined the anti-Hitler coalition, only encouraged him. The time of the start of the war depended only on combat readiness German army. A. Hitler was more interested in a peace treaty, as he was afraid of a war on two fronts. On September 1st, 1939, Germany attacked Poland. The second World War. On September 17, 1939, the Soviet government sent troops to the territory of Western Ukraine and Western Belarus, in October 1939 - to the Baltic states. See Rozanov G. L. Stalin - Hitler. Documentary essay on Soviet-German diplomatic relations, 1939 - 1941. M., 1991. S. 84 - 122. In 1940, the Baltic states and Moldova were annexed to the USSR. In the autumn of 1939, the Soviet government offered Finland to change the state border in order to move it away from Leningrad, in return they promised part of the Soviet territory. The Finnish government rejected this proposal. In October, negotiations reached an impasse. November 30, 1939 Soviet troops crossed the Finnish border. Soviet Union was expelled from the League of Nations. Germany declared its neutrality, but secretly supplied weapons to Finland. In the winter of 1939 - 1940. England and France planned an attack on the USSR and offered Germany and Italy a military alliance. In late February - early March 1940, Soviet troops broke through the Mannerheim Line. On March 12, 1940, a peace treaty was signed. The Soviet-Finnish war ended with a tactical victory for the Soviet Union, as Soviet troops broke through the enemy's defenses, and JV Stalin's demands to change the border were satisfied. However, strategically, the war ended in failure. It led to a break with future allies and almost led to a war with them and the unification of all Western countries against the USSR. Finland went over to the side of Germany and provided her with her territory for the deployment of troops, which increased the length of the Soviet-German front during the Great Patriotic War. Losses were unacceptably high for a war with a relatively weak enemy. The Soviet-Finnish war showed the weakness of the Soviet army and accelerated the German attack on the USSR. Changing the border did not strengthen the security of the northwestern borders of our country and did not prevent the blockade of Leningrad. Thus, the war with Finland only worsened the military-political situation of the Soviet Union. See Rozanov G. L. Stalin - Hitler. Documentary essay on Soviet-German diplomatic relations, 1939 - 1941. pp. 130 - 140. After the war with Finland, I. V. Stalin removed B. M. Shaposhnikov from the post of Chief of the General Staff and appointed K. A. Meretskov to this post. In September 1940, B. M. Shaposhnikov, A. M. Vasilevsky, N. F. Vatutin and A. F. Anisov drew up a plan to repel German aggression, which provided for the concentration of the main forces in Belarus. JV Stalin rejected this plan and instructed the General Staff to draw up a new plan by January 1, 1941. The new western border was not fortified. At the insistence of L. Z. Mekhlis and E. A. Shchadenko, aviation was concentrated on border airfields. After August 23, 1939, preparations for war actually ceased, since JV Stalin was afraid of provoking German aggression. The supply of strategic materials from the USSR to Germany continued until the start of the war. The border military districts were not put on alert in a timely manner. JV Stalin ignored intelligence reports about the impending German attack on the Soviet Union. The theory of war "with little blood on foreign territory" brought great harm. In May - June 1941, 28 divisions were transferred from the internal military districts to the border ones, and 800 thousand people were called up for training camps. The total strength of the Soviet army by June 22, 1941 exceeded 5 million people, but on the border there were 170 divisions consisting of 2.7 million people, 37.5 thousand guns and mortars, 1475 new tanks, 1540 new aircraft. german army, intended to attack the Soviet Union, consisted of 190 divisions, 5.5 million soldiers and officers, 47 thousand guns and mortars, 3712 tanks and assault guns, 4950 aircraft. It was divided into 3 army groups: "North", "Center" and "South". The most powerful was the Army Group Center, aimed at Moscow. They were opposed by the troops of the Leningrad, Baltic, Western, Kyiv and Odessa military districts. On June 12 - 15, 1941, the General Staff issued orders to transfer divisions located in the depths of the western border districts closer to the border, on June 19 - an order to mask all military installations and disperse aircraft at airfields. See Vasilevsky A.M. The work of a lifetime. M., 1976. S. 114 - 116. But it was impossible to carry out these orders by the beginning of the war. Thus, the main reasons for the failures of the Soviet army at the initial stage of the Great Patriotic War were the concentration of all power in the hands of I.V. Stalin, his fear of provoking a war, the untimely bringing of the border military districts to combat readiness, mass repressions against the highest command personnel, the weakness of the new borders , the wrong location of military facilities, the predominance of obsolete weapons and military equipment, although the best domestic samples surpassed their German counterparts in their combat qualities.
In the 20s - early 30s. 20th century The phenomenon of abrechestvo was considered as a revolutionary "... spontaneous protest of the mountaineers against oppression", a kind of "class struggle ..., the national liberation movement of the mountaineers, its partisan, terrorist form ...".
Some authors of that period, on the contrary, denied the possibility of identifying mountain robbery with revolutionary movement, pointing to the absence of its "relations with any revolutionary organizations", or recognizing it as a movement purely "... populist, terrorist ...". Soon, this topic, due to the official change in attitude towards populism, precisely because of its connection with terrorist methods of achieving political goals, was, as it were, under a ban and, with rare exceptions, was not raised in the historical literature. The return to it happened only in the 60s. XX century. However, there were no significant deviations from the previously developed version in understanding the nature of mountain robbery, and it was still assessed as a kind of spontaneous protest "against the national-colonial oppression of tsarism." From the same point of view, the Central Asian robbery was perceived in different periods of its self-expression.
But the above judgments are unlikely to correspond to reality, since Shamil also considered this phenomenon to be evil. Within the limits of his imamate, he waged a merciless struggle with him, severely "punishing the guilty according to Sharia" . Subsequently, while already in Russian captivity, Shamil recalled that "... many people ... executed ... for their bad nature, for robbery and robbery ...". Nevertheless, it was beyond his power to destroy this evil, from which the mountaineers themselves suffered. Somehow, in one of the campaigns, Imam Shamil himself was robbed, and even by those "whom ... he led." "Robbery and robbery" in the region was not observed only after the end of Caucasian War, although the recalcitrant regions in the mountainous zone of Dagestan and Chechnya, which served as a support for the Gazavat against Russia, had just been included in its composition. After a short period, representatives of the Russian authorities again encountered this phenomenon and were forced to make a lot of efforts to stop the activities of the detachments / gangs / abreks of Atabay, Vara and others.
The former attitude to robbery in the imamate was forgotten by the local population and the most “brave and successful” of them, according to A. Sheripov, who joined during the revolutionary confrontation of 1917-1920. to the Bolsheviks and who, as a representative of the Chechen people, made a significant contribution to the pacification of the region, "... were considered the successors of the work of Shamil and the Murids" . From the end of the nineteenth century mountain robbery began to intensify, and at the beginning of the 20th century. with the advent of the abrek Zelimkhan, who stood out in this field, it acquired an unprecedented scope, having received the name “Zelimkhanovshchina” in operational reports and in the press]. The elusiveness of Zelimkhan for many years, from 1901 to 1913, acquired him, as reported in reports to St. Petersburg, "... glory among the natives, and high-profile successes made him a folk hero" .
In this regard, songs were composed about Zelimkhan, and in the mountainous villages of Chechnya he was even given the nickname "governor of the mountains", as if in opposition to his governor imperial majesty in the Caucasus, which also expressed the desire for separatist isolation. He, as eyewitnesses said, disappeared into the mountains even, it would seem, in the most hopeless situations, being in a dense environment, using knowledge of the area for this. Zelimkhan's detachments also found shelter and operated on the territory of a number of lowland mountain communities of the North Caucasian outskirts. They also noticed in him some abilities of magical influence on others. The sheep breeder A. Mesyatsev, kidnapped by robbers and later ransomed to freedom, shared his impressions and especially noted the "power of ... prayer" of their leader. According to him, when Zelimkhan "... pronounces the sacred words of the Koran in a loud voice ... everyone participating in prayer ... sobs."
Undoubtedly, he was not without certain qualities of an organizer, a paternalistic attraction for associates and, to some extent, nobility. Zelimkhan valued courage and in some cases, admiring the courage of the Russian officers pursuing his detachments, showed them generosity if they were captured by him under any circumstances. Observing the centuries-old customs of mountain hospitality in dealing with them, he left them personal weapons during conversations and protected them from his own, preventing reprisals. As for the "help ... to the poor", attributed to the robbers, no matter what nationality they belong to, information about this is based mainly on rumors that circulated among the relevant social strata and, as a rule, could not be verified. In the mentioned editions of the 20s - early 30s. 20th century they are also given without the necessary confirmations, which makes it doubtful that these actions are really widespread. Most likely they were single, were mainly ostentatious and, in turn, contributed to the fact that, if necessary, the robbers, fleeing persecution, "dissolved" among civilians, finding shelter in a number of auls. So here one can even see a certain calculation that proceeded from selfish motives, misleading the masses and giving rise to illusions among a part of the population in the perception of a legacy that is dangerous for society, essentially a legacy that has been preserved from the past. The idea of "numerous cases of helping the poor" also existed in relation to the robbers who operated in other areas of the empire. So did, for example, the leaders of the Dagestan kachags Javad-ogly and others]. However, recent studies have shown that the considerable funds obtained during the attacks were not used for "people's needs", but, first of all, "... for organizing new murders, ... robberies, ... the purchase of weapons, etc." The material needs of the participants were also satisfied from them. However, the problem under consideration should not be trivialized. It reflects in the regional context North Caucasus the phenomenon is more stable and large-scale. This also applies to the personality of Zelimkhan himself, who was recognized as legendary.
A special commission created under the State Duma, in which “... the robbed and victims sought protection”, trying to understand the very meager information at its disposal, repeatedly raised the question: “Who is he? What circumstances turned him into an abrek? However, she could not come to an unambiguous conclusion with the involvement of only “indirect evidence” due to the secrecy of the actions of the robbers. The deputies who were part of it were lost in conjecture, expressing assumptions about the pressure of "social conditions", about the protest of "the native population of the Caucasus, oppressed by these conditions." They also tended to believe that Zelikhman was “a simple blackmailer, a robber and a murderer, mercenary and cruel…”, who went through “…a serious school of crime”, and “…frequent operations, mostly at night, developed in him…dexterity”, which ensured elusiveness . Admitted to it and "more complex psychological type, inner world which is made up of many terms, where bad instincts are intertwined with well-known political tasks ... ".
Be that as it may, Zelimkhan remained an ordinary robber, pursuing mainly narrow goals. It is hardly legitimate to compare him with the personality of Imam Shamil, who expressed the meaning of his struggle in a short saying: "I am a simple bridle, who fought for religion for thirty years ...". Nevertheless, after the defeat, he was able to rise above his former convictions and recognize the fallacy of the war against Russia, which, like other qualities, indicates the breadth of his human nature, which is certainly outstanding. Zelimkhan, on the other hand, justified his actions only by “an insult to the injustice of the authorities” and once given an oath “to avenge with blood ... the head of the Terek region for capturing and exiling his family and family ... brother”. To understand the essence of his activities, this explanation can hardly be considered exhaustive, since this measure of administrative influence acted as a kind of reaction to robberies, although dubious by legal criteria.
The practice of hostage-taking was, as is known, widespread on both sides during the Caucasian War, however, in the changed conditions at the beginning of the 20th century, when the region, without any exceptions, was already integral part Russia, it could not be effective in achieving the tasks of state stabilization. In this case, apparently, very stable teip relations, an integral element of which was responsibility for one's relatives, were not very successfully involved. This situation, contrary to the prescriptions of the Shariah, was maintained in the created imamate by Shamil, who demanded that his relatives, friends and even fellow villagers be punished for the fleeing criminal. Along with this, the archaic principle of mutual responsibility of the population for the misdeeds of members of society was also used, which was also used in central Russia.
At the same time, the tradition also assumed revenge for members of the clan (in the context under consideration - teip, but these concepts do not have complete identity) under appropriate circumstances, therefore, in the North Caucasus, such approaches often gave the opposite results. As a result of this, not least in a number of cases, opposition to the authorities was outlined, and for some periods ethnopolitical rallying in opposition to it took place even with a negative attitude towards robbery among a significant part of the native population in the lowland auls. This allowed Zelimkhan only to receive sympathy in various sectors of society, based on pity for the victim. In this situation, the Chechens either did not say anything to those who were interested in his whereabouts, or they confidently declared that “the population will never give Zelimkhan to the authorities.” But his struggle can hardly be identified with the peasant one and can be attributed to the “peasant rebels”.
For peasant protests, one way or another, the connection with the interests of agricultural production is inherent, for the robbers led by Zelimkhan, the ordinary expropriations, that is, the redistribution of property, acted as an incentive to action. Their raids had a different focus, largely unrelated to the urgent needs of this social group. Although it must be admitted, it was from its representatives, mainly from the mountainous strip of the Terek region, which was once, together with the mountainous part of the Dagestan region, Shamil's operational base in the war against Russia, mountain robbery absorbed human resources, but then turning into corporatism divorced from agricultural labor . It should be noted that settlements located both in Russian and foreign territories were attacked, the inhabitants of which were directly employed in the agricultural sector of the economy and created material values with their labor.
The governing bodies of all levels have repeatedly noted that the highlanders were pushed to the path of robbery by lack of land. This was certainly true to some extent. The upland strip of the North-Eastern Caucasus was most intensively populated by Imam Shamil during the course of the war with Russia, mainly by those highlanders who supported the idea of a ghazavat against it. Some part of the societies that lived there initially (autochthonously) formed the basis of the conflict that dragged on for almost half a century and was also subjected to appropriate ideological indoctrination. Representatives of the Russian authorities after the cessation of armed confrontation organized here in the second half of the nineteenth century. repeated trips, including to the most remote areas, to explain to the subjugated population that their “right to land ownership”, which caused the greatest concern among the mountaineers, “national and religious feelings”, etc. will be strictly respected and observed. In addition, Shamil's former associates were given assurances that after the cessation of the struggle, all "...regardless of nationality, are loyal citizens of Russia."
………………………..
The fact that the actions of robbers in the North Caucasus in the early twentieth century. do not fully fall under the category of ordinary peasant protests, indicates that they, in particular in the Vainakh ethnic environment, in some cases also appeared as “a kind of commercial organization” created by a criminal community, in which there was even a “peculiar hierarchy”. In all areas of the Caucasus, the abreks of Zelimkhan taxed through their agents various enterprises, fisheries, individual large and small farms, wealthy citizens, etc., who, under the influence of terror, often agreed to give away part of their profits or inherited wealth, not hoping for help from the authorities. Taxation corresponded, as a rule, to their wealth, and the owners were guaranteed security from possible attacks and robberies. There were almost no violations of such promises. In this respect, the North Caucasian robbery had a considerable resemblance to the Bessarabian or Novorossiysk robbery that existed in the empire in the same period.
But unlike him, the North Caucasian phenomenon was still more widespread and large-scale. Acting in detachments of several dozen, less often up to a hundred people, the robbers quickly gathered to carry out their activities, suddenly appearing in one place or another in the region, and then suddenly disappeared. The objects of their "robbery and robbery" were usually government agencies, rural and stanitsa governments, banks, treasuries, estates of large land owners, private and state industrial establishments, military posts and divisions, etc. railways, the trains following them were robbed. The intensity of these actions has especially increased since 1914.
As a result, the actions of the robbers were inevitably accompanied by the destruction of the means of production, led to the undermining of the productive forces on the North Caucasian outskirts of Russia, causing enormous economic damage, and violated state-political stability. In this regard, the interest of Russian anarchists in mountain robbery was not accidental. In February 1911, two students from Rostov-on-Don came to the Terek region from them and, with the help of several Chechens who sympathized with anarchism, saw Zelimkhan. Through translators, they explained to him the fundamental programmatic ideas of Russian anarchism and, meeting the full approval of the robber, handed him four bombs, a red flag and a specially prepared seal as a kind of symbol of involvement in their movement.
After the battle, during one of the robbery attacks in September 1911 in the Andi district, Zelimkhan's travel bag was found on the spot, in which, among various plans and seals, a seal was found confirming his sympathy for Russian anarchists. An inscription was made on the seal in a circle: “A group of Caucasian mountain anarchist terrorists. Ataman Zelim Khan. In the center of it stood out the image of crossed two rifles, crossed from top to bottom with a saber and facing the place where the muzzles on the right and left of two revolvers intersected. Such a combination of weapons, in addition to the inscription, strengthened its semantic load, emphasizing the "ruthlessness of revenge and terror" as the original fundamental ideal of the united community.
The content of this symbolism shows a good awareness of Russian anarchists, who, apparently, carefully followed the situation in the country and in the region, testifies to the features of this type of social radicalism in the North Caucasus, which consisted in the gradual loosening of state centralization and, as a result, the integrity of the country. Apparently, it was not by chance that Russians were also seen in the composition of the robber detachments, for example, in the upland part of the Dagestan region. Anarchism, as a doctrine of society based on the idea of anarchy, the destruction of the state, the establishment of a voluntary association of citizens, and recognizing only the will of an individual as a guiding principle, was, in turn, attractive to robbers. His followers in the struggle for the realization of their ideas for the reorganization of society also gave preference to terror and expropriations.
Matveev Vladimir Alexandrovich Rostov State University, teacher of the department national history the latest time.
Despite the presence of a large industrial potential, the economy of Czechoslovakia in the early 20s. faced significant difficulties. Their reasons: the narrowness of the domestic market; rupture of former economic ties; dependence on imports of many types of raw materials; greater dependence on the conjuncture of the external market; uneven development of regions (industrial potential was concentrated mainly on the territory of the Czech Republic, while Slovakia and especially Transcarpathian Ukraine were actually poor and backward agrarian appendages of the Czech Republic); imbalances in development individual industries. (heavy industry was still underdeveloped); large role of foreign capital. The Czech bourgeoisie owned 20-30% of industrial enterprises, the Slovak - only 5%. At first, Austrian, German and Hungarian capital played the leading role in the structure of foreign investments. Then there was a noticeable strengthening of French and British capital, especially in the metallurgical, mining, chemical and military industries. The Czech bourgeoisie sought to rid itself not only of foreign but also of domestic competition. It actively suppressed the development of industry in Slovakia (virtually destroyed the nascent metallurgical industry there) and in every way prevented the formation of national capital.
In 1918-20. Czechoslovakia underwent profound socio-economic reforms. Already at the end of 1918, labor and social legislation was introduced (an 8-hour working day, a system of benefits). At the beginning of 1919, a monetary reform was carried out. Shares of enterprises and banks were transferred to national currency- Czechoslovak crown. A law was also issued obliging all foreign companies operating on the territory of Czechoslovakia to move their headquarters there. This allowed the Czech bourgeoisie to strengthen its position and establish control over the main branches of industry, ousting Austrian capital from there.
In April 1919, the largest agrarian reform in the CEE countries was launched. A land maximum was set (150 hectares cultivated or 250 hectares of total area). Above this maximum, the landlords' lands were alienated in favor of the state and then sold to the peasants. In February 1920, workers' councils were introduced at industrial enterprises in the mining industry. Employees were supposed to participate in the profits of enterprises. The laws on social insurance and unemployment benefits were passed only in 1924 and 1926. main role in the created insurance system, the contributions of the workers themselves and the funds of trade unions played.
In 1919-20. there was an economic recovery. In 1922, Czechoslovakia suffered a post-war economic crisis later than other countries. It did not last long and from 1924 was replaced by a new upsurge. During the stabilization period, the Czechoslovak economy, in contrast to the economies of other CEE countries, experienced a very significant growth. By the end of 1925, the total volume of industrial output had practically reached the pre-war level. In 1926, economic growth slowed down, but from 1927 it resumed. In 1929 index industrial production amounted to 130% of the pre-war. This was facilitated by the active foreign trade and customs policy of the government. There were branches of Czech companies in more than 20 countries of the world, incl. in America and Africa. In 1928, Czechoslovakia ranked first in the world in the export of footwear, one of the first in the export of sugar and cotton fabrics. However, industrial growth was observed mainly in the Czech Republic, while in Slovakia, under the influence of the policy of the Czech bourgeoisie, industrial production was curtailed. By 1929, the agrarian reform, which created large commodity farms in the countryside, was basically completed. However, Czechoslovakia imported grain and meat.
During the 1920s Thanks to economic growth, Czech national capital has significantly strengthened its position and could compete with foreign capital. The processes of concentration and centralization of national production and capital proceeded rapidly. By the beginning of the 1930s. in Czechoslovakia, there were already 25 large national concerns (for example, the shoe giant Tomas Bati, which produced 22.5 million pairs of shoes a year) and 8 largest national banks (the largest was Zhivnostensky Bank). Czechoslovakia was the only country in CEE that even invested abroad - in Austria, Hungary, Romania, Yugoslavia and Poland.
World economic crisis of 1929-33 hit the economy of Czechoslovakia quite hard. The crisis peaked in March 1933, when the decline in industrial production amounted to 44% compared with 1929. Unemployment at the beginning of 1933 covered over 1 million people. The industrial crisis was intertwined with the agrarian one. There were so-called. "price scissors", from which the peasants suffered greatly. More than 300,000 peasant farms went bankrupt. The agrarian crisis was especially strong in Slovakia and Transcarpathian Ukraine. In 1931-32. There were significant peasant uprisings.
The government tried to save the economy by introducing elements state regulation. In 1931, a law was issued on state support for foreign trade. For the largest enterprises and banks were given government subsidies that saved them from ruin. In 1934, a ban was introduced on the closure of enterprises and the dismissal of workers. In the mid 30s. the economy began to recover, but already in 1937 there was another decline in production in the main branches of heavy and light industry. At the beginning of 1938 there were 0.5 million unemployed. Czechoslovakia experienced great difficulties with the sale of its goods, because. there was intense competition in foreign markets. In general, Czechoslovakia never managed to restore the pre-crisis level of production.
In Czechoslovakia, internal political life was very active. There were a large number of parties (more than 50) of very different political orientations. There were large bourgeois-democratic parties (PDP, Agrarian Party = Republican Party of Farmers and Small Peasants, etc.). There was also a powerful labor movement. There was a representative workers' party - ChSDP. Its left wing, dissatisfied with the moderate program of the party, broke away in September 1920 and formed the Social Democratic Left Party (ChSDP-Left). In May 1921, the Communist Party of Czechoslovakia arose on the basis of the SDLP. It was one of the major parties (in 1924 it had 138,000 members). She was a prominent participant in the parliamentary process. In 1929, Klement Gottwald came to the leadership of the Communist Party of Czechoslovakia. There was also a moderate National Socialist Party (until 1926 - the Socialist Party; leader - Eduard Benes, the first and permanent Foreign Minister of Czechoslovakia in 1918-35).
The national regions of Czechoslovakia had their own national parties. In Slovakia, there was the Slovak People's Party (Ludovtsy; Catholic priest Andrei Glinka). It was an organization of a clerical nature with a bright nationalist ideology. She demanded broad autonomy for the Slovaks. In the German-speaking areas, the German SDP operated. These national parties were among the largest in Czechoslovakia, but were not allowed to power for a long time. In the Sudetes, the German National Socialist Party arose, which was banned after Hitler came to power in Germany. Instead, the so-called. Sudeto German domestic front(Sudet German Heimatfront), in 1935 renamed the Sudeten German Party. Its founder was Konrad Henlein. Its ideology was distinguished by German nationalism, which eventually turned into separatism.
The proportional electoral system predetermined the rule of coalition cabinets. Their feature was fragility and fragility: in 20 years, 19 governments were replaced in Czechoslovakia. The president of the republic played a very prominent role in the political system. He had broad constitutional powers and great actual influence. Around President T. Masaryk, the political group "Grad" [after the name of the presidential residence] arose. It relied on the highest bureaucracy, the officer corps, intellectual organizations. At the meetings of this group, decisions were made that influenced the policy of the government. The largest parties, in turn, formed the five group in the autumn of 1920. It included the leaders of the Agrarian Party, the ChSDP, the NDP, the NSP and the people's (Catholic) parties. Similarly, in 1926, the G8 group emerged from the leaders of the largest parties. The participation of the Social Democrats in government coalitions, together with the bourgeois parties, testified to significant reformist sentiments in the working class.
In 1918-26. the offices of the so-called. "national coalition" ("red-green", i.e. bourgeois-socialist). Its basis was the blocking of parties that later belonged to the Five group. In 1919-20. the coalitions were led by the Social Democrats (the offices of V. Tusar). Then the so-called. the "non-partisan" government of Jan Cherny (September 1920 - September 1921) and the government of "national unity" Eduard Beneš (until October 1922). October 1922 to March 1926 led the coalition agrarian party. During these years, its leader Antonin Schwegla was the prime minister. [After the elections in November 1925, the ruling coalition received an advantage of only 5 mandates - 146 seats versus 141 for the opposition]. In 1923, the law "On the Protection of the Republic" was adopted, according to which the authorities could outlaw strikes, ban radical political organizations, and close their newspapers.
In March 1926, the ruling coalition broke up (the Social Democrats left it). The new prime minister was Jan Czerny, who again headed the "non-party" ("bureaucratic") cabinet. In October 1926, the so-called government was formed. "Pan", or "master" coalition, which ruled in 1926-29. The agrarian A. Shvegla [died in 1933] again became prime minister. For the first time, ministers from the German and (since the autumn of 1927) Slovak bourgeois parties were included in the cabinet of the "pansky" coalition. But the influential NSP and ChSDP went over to the opposition. In 1927, a constitutional law was passed that expanded the power of the president. At the same time, the new electoral law deprived military personnel of voting rights.
In 1929-39. ruled by "broad coalition" cabinets, consisting of representatives of a wide range of Czech, Slovak and German parties. As before, coalition governments were led mainly by the agrarian party.
Despite some retreat from democracy in the 1930s, Czechoslovakia was the only CEE country that managed to avoid the establishment of an authoritarian regime. There were 2 competing political camps. The first is the liberal-bourgeois camp. It was the Grad group, which rallied around President T. Masaryk. It was supported by bourgeois-democratic parties and social democrats. They advocated the preservation of the existing bourgeois-democratic system. In foreign policy, these forces were guided by France. The second camp is the bourgeois-conservative, "anti-gradists". They were nationalists. They advocated the establishment of an authoritarian regime. In foreign policy, they increasingly focused on Germany. The first ultra-right organizations arose in the ranks of the NDP of K. Kramař in the early 1920s. Then they dissociated themselves from the NDP and in April 1935 united in the National Fascist Community (General Hayden). Its number was about 55 thousand people. This organization adopted the ideology and organization from the Italian fascists.
In the parliamentary elections in May 1935, the agrarian party won first place. The new government was headed by its leader Milan Goggia (until September 1938). The second place was taken by the Sudeto-German Party (it collected 1.2 million votes, that is, the entire adult German population of the country actually voted for it). In Slovakia, local autonomists, the Slovak People's Party, won. Thus, the growing separatism became the main problem of the country.
The political situation became even more tense in December 1935 in connection with the resignation due to illness of the elderly President T. Masaryk [he himself died in 1937]. New presidential elections were called. The right-wing candidate was Prof. Antonin Nemec. The outgoing Masaryk proposed the candidacy of Foreign Minister Eduard Beneš (1884-1948). After heated discussions, E. Beneš (1935-1938) was elected the second president of Czechoslovakia.
Thus, in the late 20s - mid 30s. Czechoslovakia managed to preserve the foundations of a democratic system. All further political development of Czechoslovakia was directly related to the aggravated international situation.
7. Czechoslovakia in the system international relations.
From the very beginning of its independent existence, Czechoslovakia was included in the orbit of French influence. She became a member of a number of interstate treaties and pacts concluded under the auspices of France. In August 1920, the Czechoslovak-Yugoslav Treaty (Belgrade Convention) was signed, and in April 1921, the Czechoslovak-Romanian Treaty (Bucharest Agreement). They laid the foundation for the Little Entente, which lasted until 1938. The initial goal of the bloc was to help each other and jointly counter the possible growth of revanchism on the part of Hungary and Bulgaria. It was Czechoslovakia that occupied the leading position in MA due to its powerful industrial potential. In 1924, France and Czechoslovakia signed an alliance and mutual assistance treaty.
The decisions of the Locarno Conference in October 1925 greatly disturbed Czechoslovakia. Germany signed only an arbitration agreement with her, refusing to guarantee the border. This made Czechoslovakia even more firmly adhere to the pro-French orientation. Of all the small CEE countries, Czechoslovakia remained the longest loyal to France and to its allied obligations. She supported all French proposals in the field of concluding military alliances and regulating international relations. So, the Czechoslovak government in the late 20s - early 30s. approved numerous, but never implemented French projects - the creation of the so-called. "Central European Locarno" [MA + Poland + Austria + Hungary], the Balkan-Danube Federation [MA + Poland + Bulgaria + Greece + Italy], as well as the idea of "Pan-Europe" (creation of a pan-European union of states). Czechoslovakia agreed to become a member of the so-called. "Eastern Pact", the signing of which in 1934 was thwarted by Poland.
In February 1933, the "Organizational Pact" of the Little Entente was signed in Geneva. According to him, Yugoslavia, Romania and Czechoslovakia pledged to pursue a common foreign policy. For closer cooperation, the AI Permanent and Economic Councils were created. At the beginning of 1934, diplomatic relations were established with the USSR. In 1934, a mutual assistance treaty was signed with France. Immediately after the conclusion of the Soviet-French pact on mutual assistance, an agreement identical in content with the USSR on May 16, 1935 was signed by Czechoslovakia. The only difference was Article 2. At the initiative of Prague, it was written that the USSR would provide assistance to Czechoslovakia only after France did it [in Czechoslovakia, they were still afraid of the possibility of obtaining the establishment of Soviet power with Soviet help].
Hitler's rise to power in Germany dramatically complicated international position Czechoslovakia and created a direct threat to its independence. Czechoslovakia was afraid of German claims, and also feared a rapprochement between Germany and Hungary, which also had territorial claims against Czechoslovakia. In addition, the Nazi government actively supported and encouraged the separatist activities of the Sudeten-German and Slovak People's Parties, whose goals were in fact to divide the Czechoslovak state.
Back in November 1933, Hitler suggested that Czechoslovakia enter into negotiations on revising the borders. Czechoslovakia refused to enter into any negotiations with Germany without the consent and participation of France. Then Hitler found a pretext for putting pressure on Czechoslovakia - the question of the position of the German national minority in Czechoslovakia, which did not have autonomy.
In April 1937 (and then again - in September) Henlein demanded in Parliament full autonomy for the Sudetenland. The government rejected this demand and proposed its own solution program national question: the German population was to receive full equality in Czechoslovakia, proportional representation in state authorities. However, Henlein refused this project [demanded the widest autonomy, and in fact - the separation of the Sudetenland].
In February 1938, Hitler announced that Germany would protect the rights of the German population of European countries. On March 12, 1938, Germany annexed Austria, but Hitler assured Czechoslovakia that Germany had no hostile intentions towards it. However, already on March 18, Hitler accused Czechoslovakia of the national oppression of the Sudeten Germans. The USSR during March 1938 declared three times that it was ready to fulfill its obligations in the event of German aggression. He even suggested that Czechoslovakia sign a military convention that would allow the mutual assistance pact to operate automatically, without the participation of France. However, Czechoslovakia refused.
At the end of March, Henlein was received in Berlin by Hitler, where he received new instructions from him: to constantly increase the volume and nature of the demands in order to make an agreement with the government impossible and disrupt the negotiations. [Hitler told Henlein: "From tomorrow you are my viceroy!"]. At the end of April 1938, a congress of the Sudeten German Party was held in Karlovy Vary. On it, Henlein announced the so-called. "Carlsbad Program": granting all Germans the most complete autonomy, revision of the Czechoslovak foreign policy. Goji's government rejected this project, stating that the integrity of the state must be preserved.
By the end of May, the German General Staff had already developed a plan for the war with Czechoslovakia ("Grun" - "Green"). Propaganda in defense of the "oppressed Czech Germans" unfolded in Germany. On May 19, German troops began to concentrate on the Czechoslovak border. In response, on May 20, Czechoslovakia announced a partial mobilization. There was a so-called. "May Crisis" 1938 In Prague, patriotic demonstrations were held in defense of national independence. France and Great Britain declared that in the event of a German-Czechoslovak conflict they would not remain indifferent. All this forced Germany to withdraw troops from the border.
Germany was still not ready to fight Czechoslovakia. The Czechoslovak army was one of the best in Europe. She was trained by French military experts. It was equipped with the latest military equipment. Czechoslovakia owned a large military-industrial potential. The military enterprises of the Skoda concern supplied their own army and the armies of neighboring states. Chemical plants were considered the best after the German ones. There were 8 aircraft factories. [The planes were not inferior in quality to the aviation of the great powers]. In the north-west of Czechoslovakia there was a strong fortified area. As a result, Germany decided to choose a different path of pressure against Czechoslovakia.
Throughout the summer of 1938, negotiations were going on between the government and Henlein. During this time, Great Britain and France developed a common position: an armed clash with Germany must be avoided at all costs. In August 1938, the British Commissioner Lord W. Runciman [Chairman of the Royal Privy Council in 1938-39] was sent to Prague. The purpose of the Runciman Mission was to force Czechoslovakia to make concessions to Germany. In September, Hitler declared that the only satisfactory solution was to hand over the Sudetenland to Germany. President Benes agreed to almost all of Henlein's demands for German autonomy. However, Henlein demanded an end to the alliance with France, and negotiations broke down. On September 18, the Henleinites raised an uprising in the Sudetenland, which was crushed. The Sudeten German Party was banned, but Henlein fled to Germany.
On September 19, Benes received an Anglo-French recommendation: to hand over to Germany all areas of Czechoslovakia, where the Germans were the majority of the population. At the same time, Poland demanded from Czechoslovakia the transfer of the Teshinka region to it, and Hungary - Slovakia and Transcarpathian Ukraine. Benes refused to comply with all these demands. However, on September 21, Great Britain and France announced that they would not provide assistance to Czechoslovakia. As a result, the Goji government agreed to accept the German demands. This sparked protests across the country. A new government was created, which was headed by the inspector general of the Czechoslovak Armed Forces, General J. Syrovy (September 22 - December 1, 1938). He led a general mobilization. The USSR announced that it would help Czechoslovakia even if France did not. The only condition for receiving Soviet military assistance was to be the readiness of Czechoslovakia to defend itself and its official request to the USSR for help. [30 Soviet divisions were brought to the western border].
At this time, Hitler assured Britain and France that the Sudetenland was his last territorial claim in Europe. On September 29-30, 1938, a conference of Great Britain, France, Germany and Italy was held in Munich. Her decision was presented to Benes in the form of an ultimatum, and he agreed (did not want a war). From October 1 to October 10, Germany occupied the Sudetenland and areas with a predominantly German population (41 thousand square kilometers, about 5 million people, of which more than 1 million were Czechs and Slovaks). Within 3 months, the territorial claims of Poland and Hungary were to be satisfied. On October 2, the Poles occupied Teszyn. In November 1938, Germany and Italy held the so-called. "I Vienna Arbitration", at which the southern regions of Slovakia and Transcarpathian Ukraine were transferred to Hungary. In total, in the fall of 1938, Czechoslovakia lost 29% of its territory, 34% of its population, and 40% of its industrial potential. The new border with Germany was 40 km from Prague. [The Sudetenland at first constituted a separate Reichskommissariat. K. Henlein was appointed Reichskommissar of the Sudetenland. The Sudetes were later turned into the "Imperial Region of Sudetenland". Henlein again became the Reichsstatthalter of this region].
After Munich, the period of the Second Republic began in Czechoslovakia. On October 5, 1938, President E. Benes resigned and left the country. The Czech Emil Haha became the new president in November, and the agrarian Rudolf Beran became prime minister on December 1. In November, the Communist Party of Czechoslovakia was banned and all political parties disbanded. The bourgeois parties and the NSP merged into the National Unity Party, led by R. Beran. Strengthened executive power. Presidential decrees received the force of law. Some legislative functions began to belong to the government. Political parties in Slovakia and Carpathian Rus began to actively demand broad autonomy. These requirements were met. A special law in November 1938 introduced the autonomy of Slovakia and Transcarpathian Ukraine as part of a single republic, which became known as Czecho-Slovakia. National governments were formed - Slovak, headed by J. Tiso and Ruthenian, headed by A. Brody. National Diets were elected.
Meanwhile, Germany in February 1939 refused to guarantee the Czechoslovak borders and encouraged the separatist aspirations of the Slovak People's Party. As a result of the conflict with the central government, the autonomous Slovak government was dissolved and martial law was introduced in Slovakia. On March 13, Josef Tiso, at the request of Hitler, declared Slovakia an "independent state". President E. Gakh was summoned to Berlin. There he signed an ultimatum to place the fate of Czechoslovakia in the hands of the Reich. On March 14, Hungary occupied the entire Transcarpathian Ukraine. On March 15, German troops occupied the Czech Republic. It became part of Germany as the Reich Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia. The former German Foreign Minister (in 1932-38) Konstantin von Neurath was appointed Reich Protector of BM - from 1939 to 1943. Slovakia was declared an "independent republic" headed by the pro-fascist regime of J. Tiso. She was taken "under protection" by Germany. The Czechoslovak state ceased to exist. Britain and France verbally protested.
E. Benes in exile in Paris headed the Czechoslovak National Committee in 1939-40, after the capitulation of France, he moved to London. A Czechoslovak national government in exile was formed there. In July 1940, E. Beneš was again elected President of the Czech Republic (until the autumn of 1948).
Topic IV. Yugoslavia in 1918 - 1941
8. Formation of the Kingdom of the SHS.
9. The Kingdom of the CXC in the 20s 20th century
10. Yugoslavia in the 30s 20th century
11. Yugoslavia in the system of international relations.
Formation of the Kingdom of the SHS.
After the occupation of Serbia and Montenegro by the Austro-Hungarian troops, the Serbian government, headed by Nikola Pasic, moved to the island of Corfu. In 1915, emigrants from Austria-Hungary established the Yugoslav Committee in London, headed by the Croat Ante Trumbich. On June 20, 1917, Pasic and Trumbich signed the Corfu Declaration on the creation in the future of a single kingdom of the CXC. Serbia was to become its basis.
In the summer of 1918, provisional local governments on an inter-party basis began to emerge in the South Slavic provinces of the empire - people's councils. Their goal was to unite all the South Slavic lands of Austria-Hungary into one state. On October 6, 1918, members of the leading parties of Croatia, Slovenia and other regions formed the Central People's Council in Zagreb. Anton Koroshets, the leader of the Slovenian People's Party, became its chairman. The veche declared itself the representative of all southern Slavs in Austria-Hungary. On October 29, 1918, the People's Veche announced the withdrawal of all South Slavic provinces from Austria-Hungary and the formation of an independent State of Slovenes, Croats and Serbs. It included Croatia, Slovenia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Slavonia, Vojvodina and Dalmatia. His government was the Central People's Council in Zagreb.
That. 2 centers arose that claimed to unite all Yugoslav lands - Zagreb and Belgrade. Belgrade put forward the slogan of unification with Serbia of all southern Slavs. Serbia had the authority of a long-term stronghold of the liberation movement in the Balkans. The assemblies of Vojvodina and Montenegro (they overthrew King Nikola I Negosh) expressed a desire to unite with Serbia. There was also the threat of Italian intervention in the Balkans. France decided to support Serbia, because. a large South Slavic state could become a counterweight to Italy in the Balkans. During negotiations between representatives of the Serbian government, the Yugoslav Committee and the Central People's Council in November 1918, a decision was made to unite all South Slavic lands with Serbia. On November 24, 1918, the People's Council in Zagreb adopted a decision on the entry of the State of Slovenes, Croats and Serbs into the Serbian Kingdom. On December 1, 1918, a corresponding appeal was submitted to Belgrade. On December 4, Prince Regent Alexander, on behalf of the Serbian king, issued a manifesto announcing the creation of the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes. The question of the political and administrative structure of the new state was to be decided by the Constituent Assembly.
That. almost all Yugoslav lands (except for the part of Carinthia, divided between Italy and Austria) were united under the scepter of the Serbian dynasty Karageorgievich. The positive outcome of this event was the deliverance from the centuries-old Austro-Hungarian rule. However, the new state was not federal, but unitary, where Serbia played a decisive role, which caused tension in national relations. The first SHS government was created on December 20, 1918 and was of a compromise nature: it was headed by one of the leaders of the Serbian Radical Party, Stojan Protic, Anton Koroshets became vice-premier, and Ante Trumbich, minister of foreign affairs.
The boundaries of the Kingdom of the CXC were determined by the Saint-Germain, Neuilly and Trianon treaties. Its territory amounted to 248 thousand square meters. km, population - about 12 million people. Belgrade became the capital. The dominant nation was the Serbs (39% of the population), which caused an increase in nationalism among other peoples who were in a subordinate position. Representative institutions (assemblies, councils) were liquidated in national regions. Macedonians and Albanians were banned from using native language in schools, the press and government agencies. In addition, religious contradictions appeared between the Orthodox (48% of the population - Serbs, Montenegrins, Macedonians), Catholics (37% of the population - Croats, Slovenes) and Muslims (11% of the population - Muslim Bosnians and Albanians, the latter constituted the third largest ethnic group in Yugoslavia; Serbs called Yugoslav Albanians Arvanites. Albanians lived compactly in the province of Kosovo: according to the censuses of 1921 and 39. they made up 2/3 of the local population).
The territories of the SHS were not homogeneous in socio-economic terms. Serbia was a moderately developed agrarian-industrial country. However, in terms of general economic development Slovenia and Croatia were higher. In Vojvodina, agriculture was better developed than in Serbia, but industry was weak. Montenegro, Bosnia and Herzegovina were backward regions with remnants of the patriarchal and semi-feudal structures.
folding political system Kingdom of the SHS took place in difficult conditions. Leading position in political life occupied by Serbian parties. Among them, the key ones were the Serbian Radical Party (Stojan Protic) and the Democratic Party of Serbia (founded in 1919 by Ljubomir Davidovich). The national forces raised the question of the autonomy of the peoples in the Union of Artists. Already in December 1918 there were uprisings in Montenegro and Croatia. HRCP - Croatian Republican Peasant Party (leader - Stepan Radic; the name emphasizes the claim for an independent role of Croatia) on December 8, 1920, even declared a "peasant republic" in Croatia (HCR lasted 1 day). In 1919, the Yugoslav Muslim Organization (YUMO) was created, which advocated a federal structure of the state and granting autonomy to the Muslim population of the country. Ever since the beginning of the 20th century. On the territory of Kosovo, the Kosovo National Defense Committee (KK), created in Albania, operated, demanding the transfer of the territory of Kosovo and Metohija to Albania. [Italian Foreign Minister Ciano: "Kosovo is a knife aimed at the backbone of Yugoslavia"]. In Macedonia, the Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Organization (VMRO, V. Mikhailov), created in Bulgaria by Macedonian emigrants, operated illegally. She demanded the separation of Macedonia from Yugoslavia and its annexation to Bulgaria. In the 1920s between KK and VMRO an agreement was concluded to support each other.
At the end of April 1919, the Social Democrats of the SHS merged into the Socialist Workers' Party (Communists) - SWP (k). In June 1920, the SWP (k) was renamed the CPY. She has become quite a significant force in society.
In the autumn of 1920, an election law was issued, which introduced universal suffrage for men from 21, except for military personnel. On November 28, 1920, elections to the Constituent Assembly were held. 1st and 2nd places were occupied by pro-government DPS and SRP. The CPY got the 3rd place. In Croatia, the HRKP received the majority of votes. The US was opened on December 12, 1920. However, already at the end of December 1920, a government decree (“Obznana”) was issued to ban propaganda activities of the CPY and communist agitation. 10 thousand people were arrested.
June 28, 1921, on the day of St. Vida (the anniversary of the battle with the Turks on the Kosovo field in 1389), the "Vidovdan" constitution was adopted. 40% of the deputies (161) were absent during the voting - members of the opposition parties (CPY, HRKP, etc.). The constitution was adopted mainly thanks to the Serb deputies and with the opposition of the deputies from the national regions. The constitution introduced a regime of parliamentary monarchy. The unicameral National Assembly became the legislative body. The king received very broad powers - the right to initiate legislation, appoint and dismiss ministers, issue decrees, and command the Armed Forces. Women did not receive voting rights. The SHS was declared a unitary state. The Croatian population did not even receive the rights they had in Austria-Hungary.
The new government was headed by Nikola Pasic (PSA). The radical left forces organized an assassination attempt on the king (June 29) and the murder of the Ministry of Internal Affairs (July 21). On August 2, 1921, the law "On the protection of public safety and order" was issued. The activities of the Communist Party of Yugoslavia were banned, communists were fired from government agencies. Belonging to the CPY was punishable by hard labor up to 20 years. All 58 communist deputies were arrested and convicted. The leadership of the CPY fled abroad.