Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
SpringerLink
Log in

The SRs and the Trade Union Movement

  • Chapter
Russian Workers and the Socialist-Revolutionary Party through the Revolution of 1905–07

Part of the book series: Studies in Soviet History and Society ((SSHS))

  • 11 Accesses

Abstract

Before 1905 the SRs paid relatively little attention to labour questions in general and the workers section of the party programme in particular. Of more than ninety pamphlets and brochures produced by the Central Committee during 1902–3, for example, only two were on subjects of direct concern to the urban worker.1 The same trend is discernible in the party’s official organ Revolyutsionnaya Rossiya, even if there the shortfall is less obvious. Analysis of labour affairs was sparse and confined largely to exposing the motives behind police socialism and to discussing the place of political strikes and demonstrations in revolutionary strategy. Questions relating to the party programme and to working conditions were left to the propaganda sections of the local committees. One does not have to look too far for explanations of this neglect. In the three short years before the revolution SR policy-makers were preoccupied with elaborating and refining the details of their agrarian programme, the party’s most distinctive contribution to the revolutionary movement. The bias in favour of the peasant seemed fully justified in view of the serious disturbances which erupted in the Ukranian provinces less than twelve months after the party’s formation. Even had the SRs wanted to devote more attention to the urban movement, however, their leaders’ lack of expertise in labour affairs would have proved a considerable hindrance.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 29.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes and References

  1. P. P. Maslov, ‘Narodnicheskie Partii’, in ODR, vol III, bk 5, p. 98. One pamphlet was devoted to worker disturbances in Rostov, the other to unemployment.

    Google Scholar 

  2. In the sense that it was Gershuni who founded the Minsk ‘Workers’ Party for the Political Liberation of Russia’ in 1898. Like Lebedev, the Moscow activists, I. I. Fundaminskii, V. V. Rudnev and V. M. Zenzinov were all in their early or mid-twenties in 1905 and comparatively inexperienced in revolutionary affairs.

    Google Scholar 

  3. See the discussion in Protokoly 1906, pp. 316–25; supplement, pp. 17–40.

    Google Scholar 

  4. The debate on these issues is recounted in chapter 2 of the present study.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Protokoly 1906, p. 338.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Protokoly 1907, p. 13.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Ibid., p. 134.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Ibid., p. 172.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Third Council resolutions in Pamyatnaya Knizhka, p. 20.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Protokoly 1908, p. 78.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Ibid., p. 75.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Ibid., pp. 75–6.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Ibid., pp. 231–5.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Izveshchenie pyatogo Soveta PSR (May 1909), p. 18.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Protokoly 1909, 22nd session, p. 1, Archive 792.

    Google Scholar 

  16. For the precursors and early history of the Russian trade union movement see D. Antoshkin, Professional’noe Dvizhenie v Rossii (3rd edn.), pp. 40–70; S. Ainzaft, Pervyietap professional’nogo dvizheniya v Rossii (1905–07gg) (Moscow, 1924), pp. 5–41;

    Google Scholar 

  17. V. Grinevich, Professional’noe dvizhenie rabochikh v Rossii (3rd edn.; Moscow, 1923), pp. 3–20; and for police socialist unions, see J. Schneiderman, Sergei Zubatov and Revolutionary Marxism.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Antoshkin, Professional’noe dvizhenie, p. 89.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Ibid., pp. 106–7.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Antoshkin, Professional’noe dvizhenie, pp. 146–55; Ainzaft, Pervyi etap professional’nogo dvizheniya v Rossii, pp. 57–65; Grinevich, Professional’noe dvizhenie, pp. 58–62.

    Google Scholar 

  21. See the discussion in Ainzaft, pp. 65 ff. ; Grinevich, pp. 70–6.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Elwood, Social Democracy in the Underground, pp. 190ff.

    Google Scholar 

  23. For the post-1907 history of the unions, see the relevant chapters in Antoshkin, Professional’noe Dvizhenie v Rossii. By 1910 there were only 35 000 registered trade union members throughout Russia. Between 1906 and 1910, 497 unions were officially closed and there were 604 cases of unions being refused registration (Antoshkin, pp. 140–4).

    Google Scholar 

  24. V. Bonnell, ‘Radical Politics and Organised Labour in Pre-Revolutionary Moscow, 1905–1914’, JSH, XII, 1 (1978), pp. 289ff.; also Bonnell, ‘The Politics of Labour’, passim.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Chapter 5, p. 81.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Maslov, ‘Narodnicheskie Partii’, p. 109.

    Google Scholar 

  27. PI, no. 4 (January 1907), pp. 2–9 (Chernov uses the pseudonym ‘Gardenin’).

    Google Scholar 

  28. ‘Konferentsiya po voprosam prof. dvizheniya’, Trud, no. 9 (February 1907), p.14.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Trud, no. 11 (March 1907), pp. 1–3.

    Google Scholar 

  30. ‘K zakonoproektu S-r gruppy o professional’nykh soyuzakh’, in Trud, no. 13 (April 1907), pp. 5–6. These proposals were chiefly intended to have an agitational significance. They advocated trade unions for every category of worker, to be formed without any formal requirement for registration; freedom to combine and amalgamate trade unions; trade union control over private assets and funds, criminal and

    Google Scholar 

  31. financial immunity in the course of normal union activities; union representation on factory inspectorates, sanitary commissions, and so on, and prosecution of anyone or any organisation infringing union rights. For the full text, see To povodu proekta zakona o professional’nykh soyuzakh sostavlennogo rabochei komissiei dumskoi gruppy sotsialistov-revolyutsionnerov’, in Volya i Zemlya, no. 1 (April 1907), pp. 5–6, Archive 743.

    Google Scholar 

  32. ZT, no. 2 (July 1907), pp. 1–4. The third party council met between 8 and 11 July 1907 (Materialy, Archive 679).

    Google Scholar 

  33. See, for example: Vpered, no. 2 (Perm’, October 1907), Archive 478; Bor’ba, no. 2 (Motovilikha, May 1907), Archive 478; Rabochii listok, no. 1 (Sevastopol’, August 1907), Archive 488; Izvestiya Ukrainskogo oblastnogo komiteta PSR, no. 1 (June 1907), Archive 482; Trud, no. 17 (Petersburg, October 1907), Archive 472.

    Google Scholar 

  34. See below.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Izveshchenie pyatogo Soveta PSR, pp. 16–17.

    Google Scholar 

  36. ‘Nasha pozitsiya v professional’nom dvizhenii’, ZT, no. 2 (July 1907), pp. 1–4.

    Google Scholar 

  37. In English in the original.

    Google Scholar 

  38. There is no specific indication that Chernov was thinking of the Russian Social Democrats as such. The position outlined here is close to that adopted by the German Social Democrats at the Stuttgart Congress of the Socialist International in August 1907. See G. D. H. Cole, A History of Socialist Thought, vol III, pt. 1 (London 1970), p. 72. For the complex, sometimes bemusing history of the Russian Social-Democratic factions’ approach to the trade union movement, see the following: Grinevich, Professional’noe dvizhenie, pp. 173–83; Antoshkin, Professional’noe dvizhenie, pp. 139–45; Bonnell, ‘The Politics of Labour’, pp. 194–5; Swain, Russian Social Democracy and the Legal Labour Movement, Introduction.

    Google Scholar 

  39. The following presentation of the SR position is based on: V. M. Chernov, in Znamya Truda (see n. 35 above); third and fourth party council resolutions (Pamyatnaya Knizhka, I, pp. 30–36); ‘Professional’nye soyuzy i partiya sotsialistov-revolyutsionerov’, Trud, no. 17 (October 1907), pp. 3–6; ‘K voprosu o professional’nykh soyuzakh’, Trud, no. 11 (March 1907), pp. 1–3; Yu. Gardenin (Chernov), ‘III s”ezd vseross. zh. D. Soyuza’, PI, no. 4 (January 1907), pp. 2–9; Toliticheskii indifferentizm i neitral’nost professional’nykh soyuzov’, Professional’noe dvizhenie: obzor dey atel’nosti rabochikh soyuzov v Rossii i za granitsei-Petersburg, no. 1 (May 1907), pp. 2–5.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Toliticheskii indifferentizm’ (Professional’noe dvizhenie), p. 3.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Ibid.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Third Party Council resolutions, Pamyatnaya Knizhka, I, p. 34. This phrase was standard to trade unions formed during the 1905–7 period.

    Google Scholar 

  43. ‘Gardenin’ (Chernov), PI, no. 4 (January 1907), p. 4.

    Google Scholar 

  44. ZT, no. 2 (July 1907), p. 1; Trud, no. 17 (October 1907), p. 5.

    Google Scholar 

  45. PI, no. 4 (January 1907), p. 5.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Trud, no. 11 (March 1907), pp. 3–5.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Trud, no. 13 (April 1907), p. 6.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Third Council resolutions, p. 33; ZT, no. 2 (July 1907), p. 3.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Toliticheskii indifferentizm’, p. 3.

    Google Scholar 

  50. ZT, no. 2, p. 3.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Kautsky allegedly advocated neutrality under existing Russian conditions in a letter to Social Democrats in Baku (Toliticheskii indifferentizm’, p. 5). The authority of the International is claimed in the article: ‘Rossiiskaya Sotsial-demokratiya i professional’nye soyuzy’, in ZT, no. 8 (December 1907), pp. 9–10, here p. 10; and in Trud, no. 17 (October 1907), p. 5.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Toliticheskii indifferentizm’, p. 5.

    Google Scholar 

  53. Third Council resolutions, p. 33.

    Google Scholar 

  54. ZT, no. 2 (July 1907), pp. 3–4, ‘S”ezd professional’nykh soyuzakh i tsentral’noe buro’, ZT, no. 8 (December 1907), pp. 6–9, here pp. 8–9.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Some Bolsheviks advocated fully-political trade unions which would officially adopt the programme of the RSDLP. The political platform was a much broader concept, however, as will be revealed in due course.

    Google Scholar 

  56. H. F. Reichman, ‘Russian Railwaymen in the Revolution of 1905’, PhD thesis, California/Berkeley, 1977, p. 328.

    Google Scholar 

  57. ‘S vserossiiskoi konferentsii pechatnikov (doklad po voprosu ob otnoshenii professional’nykh soyuzov k partiyam predstavitelya PSR)’, in Professional’noe dvizhenie, no. 1 (May 1907), pp. 10–13, here p. 12.

    Google Scholar 

  58. Ustav ARRU (reprinted by the Ryazan’-Urals railway branch), Archive 329.

    Google Scholar 

  59. See Grinevich, Professional’noe dvizhenie, p. 172.

    Google Scholar 

  60. See n. 55, above.

    Google Scholar 

  61. Grinevich, Professional’noe dvizhenie, p. 173.

    Google Scholar 

  62. Ibid.

    Google Scholar 

  63. For the early history of the ARRU and the Russian railway industry in general see Reichman, ‘Russian Railwaymen’, and W. Sablinsky, ‘The All-Russian Railroad Union and the Beginning of the General Strike in October 1905’, in A. I. Rabinowitch, Revolution and Politics in Russia. Essays in Memory of B. I. Nicolaevsky (Bloomington, Ind., 1972).

    Google Scholar 

  64. See the Petersburg section of this study, chapter 5 pp. 122–3.

    Google Scholar 

  65. One-third of railway workers in Belorussia, for example, were peasants who maintained economic ties with the countryside (Reichman ‘Russian Railwaymen’, p. 33).

    Google Scholar 

  66. PI, no. 4 (January 1907), p. 2.

    Google Scholar 

  67. See, for example: Tochka zreniya tsentral’nogo byuro vserossiiskogo zheleznodorozhnogo soyuza na predstoyashchuyu vseobshchuyu zheleznodorozhnuyu zabastovku (Petersburg, August 1906), Archive 329. and: K vsem zheleznodorozhnikam (postanovlenie konferentsii predstavitelei zheleznykh dorog, sozvannoi dlya resheniya voprosa o vseobshchei zabastovke v svyazi s rospuskom gosudarstvennoi dumy, Archive 658. The participation of railwaymen was to be conditional on a mass rising of workers and peasants.

    Google Scholar 

  68. See below, p. 189.

    Google Scholar 

  69. PI, no. 4, p. 2.

    Google Scholar 

  70. Odd copies of the journals are to be found in Archives 329 and 658.

    Google Scholar 

  71. ‘Zheleznodorozhnyi professional’nyi soyuz i politicheskaya platforma’, in Lokomotiv, no. 5 (Petersburg, May 1907), Archive 329.

    Google Scholar 

  72. See the MS signed by Pereverzev and dated 30.10.1908 which asked for 800r. in order to re-start publication of the journal, Zheleznodorozhnyi Soyuz, which ran out of funds after five numbers. See also a typed (and undated) letter to the Central Committee of the PSR from agents of the ARRU (both documents in Archive 329).

    Google Scholar 

  73. ‘Zametka o sovremennom sostoyanii vserossiiskogo zheleznodorozhnogo soyuza’, in ZT, no. 13/14, pp. 22–3.

    Google Scholar 

  74. ‘Novyi pod”em’, ZT, no. 53 (April 1914), pp. 1–2.

    Google Scholar 

  75. Reichman, ‘Russian Railwaymen’, p. 452.

    Google Scholar 

  76. PI, no. 4 (January 1907), p. 8.

    Google Scholar 

  77. ‘O konferentsiyakh Peterburgskogo uzla vserossiiskogo-zheleznodorozhnogo soyuza’, in Trud, no. 9 (February 1907), pp. 8–10, here p. 10 (even here the voting was close).

    Google Scholar 

  78. Otchet o konferentsii Moskovsko-Yaroslavsko-Arkhangel’skoi Zheldor., Archive 658.

    Google Scholar 

  79. PI, no. 4, p. 2.

    Google Scholar 

  80. The relevant documents are the following: typed report of the Central Bureau, ARRU (May 1906); Proekt vremennogo soglasheniya vserossiiskogo zheleznodorozhnogo soyuza s sotsialisticheskimi partiyami o vzaimnykh otnosheniyakh soyuza i partii pri rabote ikh sredi zhelezno-dorozhnykh rabochikh i sluzhashchikh, Archive 329. (A conference had discussed these subjects in April 1906.)

    Google Scholar 

  81. M. Dmitriev (see n. 69 above).

    Google Scholar 

  82. PI, no. 4 (January 1907), p. 6.

    Google Scholar 

  83. Chernov, whether intentionally or not, was apparently telling only half the story. While Moscow metalworkers were urged by their union to vote for Social Democrats, the Union of Weaving and Knitting workers supported the PSR. See Bonnell, ‘The Politics of Labour’, p. 175. (Bonnell cites Professional’nye Vestnik as her source.)

    Google Scholar 

  84. ZT, no. 6 (September 1907), p. 15. See also: Protokoly zanyatii konferentsii rabotnikov po professional’nomu dvizheniyu Tavricheskogo Soyuza PSR (5–7 August 1907), Archive 596.

    Google Scholar 

  85. This approach accords with that adopted by the Bolsheviks at their London congress in 1907. See Elwood, Social Democracy in the Underground, pp. 194ff.

    Google Scholar 

  86. ZT, no. 8 (December 1907), p. 8.

    Google Scholar 

  87. Ibid.

    Google Scholar 

  88. This union was of some strategic importance but its membership was comparatively small and its activities limited. For material on the union see ‘O volzhskoi sudokhodnoi organizatsii PS-R’, in PI, no. 8 (April 1907), pp. 8–9, and documents in Archive 177.

    Google Scholar 

  89. See the relevant chapters of this study. Also Heather Hogan, ‘Labour and Management in Conflict’, PhD thesis, University of Michigan, 1981, p. 338.

    Google Scholar 

  90. See Engelstein, Moscow 1905; Bonnell ‘The Politics of Labor’; MS of Summer 1907 in Archive 333. (The SRs claimed to have a lot of

    Google Scholar 

  91. sympathisers in the Moscow print-workers’ union at this time.)

    Google Scholar 

  92. These are the phrases used in the MS fragment Istoriya professional’-nogo dvizheniya v Rossii in Archive 638/II.

    Google Scholar 

  93. ‘Massovaya bor’ba i professional’noe dvizhenie’, in Rabochii Listok, no. 2 (October 1907), Archive 488.

    Google Scholar 

  94. For Baku see the relevant section of this study; for Khar’kov: Archive 792; Kiev: ZT, no. 16 (March 1909), p. 6; Caucasus; Sovremennik no. 4 (September 1909), p. 1, Archive 551.

    Google Scholar 

  95. Lebedev, ‘Rabochaya organizatsiya (Zametka propagandista)’, in ZT, no. 16 (March 1909), pp. 5–8.

    Google Scholar 

  96. ‘Ekonomicheskaya bor’ba v podpol’e’, in ZT, no. 18 (May 1909), pp. 3–7.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. Christopher Rice
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Copyright information

© 1988 Christopher Rice

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Rice, C. (1988). The SRs and the Trade Union Movement. In: Russian Workers and the Socialist-Revolutionary Party through the Revolution of 1905–07. Studies in Soviet History and Society. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-19252-6_8

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-19252-6_8

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-349-19254-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-349-19252-6

  • eBook Packages: Palgrave History CollectionHistory (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation