Ocultar
Exibir todos
Enviar artigo via e-mail THE RUSSIAN REVOLUTION OF 1917: METHODOLOGICAL APPROACHES AND MODERN THEORIES
Resumo
Objective: The article considers the main theoretical concepts of the Russian historical science used to study the Russian Revolution of 1917. Methods: They are selected from monographs, articles and chronicles, and form a special source of information. Results: A historiographic review demonstrates that these concepts (party, Marxist, systemic, structural, behavioral, neo-constitutional approaches, optimistic and pessimistic practices, conspiracy theory) reflect the ideology and subject of research rather than offer scientific tools. There is an opinion that the historiographical and source base for studying the Russian Revolution of 1917 formed the positivist practice of collecting facts and documents. Marxism-Leninism influenced the study of specific topics and certain names. Starting with the first (lifetime) edition of the works of V.I. Lenin, the principle of historicism provided a large number of terms, events and biographical information, which established an extensive historical context and cause-and-effect relationships. Marxism is important for studying the revolution as a variant of historical materialism and is crucial for understanding the ideological heritage of the revolution and the motivation of its leaders. According to some scholars, Marxism also justified the struggle for power in 1917. At the same time, Marxism cannot explain the subsequent events since a radically complex mass society cannot be described by classical theories, old terms and methods. Marxism is applicable to describe the ideological context of 1917 but fails to analyze contemporary events. Conclusion: Thus, the authors of the article propose a thesis about the chronological correspondence of the chosen methods to the events under study. Modern methodological approaches provide different theoretical knowledge about the Russian Revolution of 1917 suitable for new generations but lose the historical context understandable to the previous generation. New approaches (structuralism, deconstructivism, discourse analysis and global history) aim at describing rather than explaining revolutionary events.
Palavras-chave
Texto completo:
PDF (English)Referências
Althusser, L. (1962). Contradiction and overdetermination. In L. Althusser, For Marx. Part III: Notes for an investigation. New York: Penguin Press. Retrieved from https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/althusser/1962/overdetermination.htm
Althusser, L. (1971). Lenin and philosophy and other essays. London: New Left Review.
Arkhiv russkoi revolyutsii [The archive of the Russian Revolution of 1917]. (1921). In 22 vols. Berlin: Izd. G.V. Gessen.
Avdeev, N. (1923). Revolyutsiya 1917 goda: Khronika sobytii [The Russian Revolution of 1917: Chronicles]. Moscow; Petrograd: Gosudarstvennoe izdatelstvo.
Bakhrevskii, E.V., & Svistunova, E.A. (2019). Obraz Rossii v Turtsii. Istoricheskoe razvitie i sovremennoe sostoyanie [The image of Russia in Turkey. Historical development and modern state]. Moscow: Institut Naslediya.
Buldakov, V.P. (2009). Oktyabrskaya revolyutsiya: Sovremennaya sudba starykh mifov [The Bolshevik Revolution: The modern fate of old myths]. In A. A. Sorokin (Ed.), Oktyabr 1917: Vyzovy dlya XXI veka (pp. 115-120). Moscow: LENAND.
Chubaryan, A.O. (Ed.). (2014). Teoriya i metodologiya istoricheskoi nauki. Terminologicheskii slovar [The theory and methodology of historical science. Dictionary of terms]. Moscow: Akvilon.
Dan, J. (2008). Revolyutsiya [Revolution]. In L. E. Blyakher, B. V. Mezhuev, & A. V. Pavlov (Eds.), Kontsept "revolyutsiya" v sovremennom politicheskom diskurse (pp. 108-129). Saint Petersburg: Aleteiya.
Feldman, M.A. (2015). Bolshevizm: Nelegkii put k razgadke fenomena [Bolshevism: A hard way to understanding the phenomenon]. Obshchestvennye nauki i sovremennost, 1, 100-107.
Fomina, V.A. (1960). Obshchestvennoe soznanie i zakonomernosti ego razvitiya [Social consciousness and rules of its development]. Moskva: Izd-vo MGU.
GASK (Gosudarstvennyi arkhiv Stavropolskogo kraya) [The State Archive of Stavropol Krai]. (1920). Pervye shagi gramoty dlya vzroslykh. Fund 164. List 1. Case 446. Page 9.
Gerasimenko, G.A. (1995). Narod i vlast (1917 god) [People and power (1917)]. Moscow: Voskresene.
Grinin, L.E., Korotaev, A.V., & Malkov, A.V. (Eds.). (2010). O prichinakh russkoi revolyutsii [On causes of the Russian Revolution]. Moscow: Izdatelstvo LKI.
Jorgensen, M., & Phillips, L. (2008). Diskurs-analiz. Teoriya i metod [Discourse analysis. Theory and method]. Kharkov: izdatelstvo "Gumanitarnyi tsentr".
Kautsky, K. (2003). K kritike teorii i praktiki marksizma ("Antibernshtein") [The criticism of the theory and practice of Marxism ("Anti-Bernstein")]. Moscow: Editorial URSS.
Kelle, V.Zh., & Kovalzon, M.Ya. (1969). Kurs istoricheskogo materializma [The course of historical materialism]. Moscow: Vysshaya shkola.
Kireev, N.G. (2007). Istoriya Turtsii XX vek [The history of Turkey. The 20th century]. Moscow, IV RAN: Kraft+.
Klaehr, A. (2010). Der Marxismus-Leninismus als Ausdruck wissenschaftlicher Geschichtserkenntnis? Zur Wissenschaftlichkeit der Historiographie in der DDR. Retrieved from http://www.geschichte-erforschen.de/wissenschaft/ddr-geschichtswissenschaft/index.html.
Martov, Yu.O. (1923). Mirovoi bolshevism [Global Bolshevism]. Berlin: Iskra.
Marx, K., & Engels, F. (1959). Sochineniya [The selected works]. The 2nd edn. Vol. 13. Moscow: Gospolitizdat.
Medushevskii, A.N. (2007). Prichiny krusheniya demokraticheskoi respubliki v Rossii 1917 goda [The reasons behind the collapse of the Russian democratic republic in 1917]. Otechestvennaya istoriya, 6, 3-27.
Mosolov, V.G. (2010). IMEL – Tsitadel partiinoi ortodoksii: Istorii Instituta marksizma-leninizma pri TsK KPSS, 1921-1956 [The Marx-Engels-Lenin Institute is the fortress of party-based Orthodoxy: The history of the institute attached to the governing Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, 1921-1956]. Moscow: Novyi khronograf.
Nikonov, V.A. (2011). Krushenie Rossii [The fall of Russia]. Moscow: AST: Astrel.
Oizerman, T.I. (2001). Materialisticheskoe ponimanie istorii: Plyusy i minusy [The materialistic understanding of history: Pros and cons]. Voprosy filosofii, 2, 16-23.
Pantin, I.K. (2015). Russkaya revolyutsiya. Idei, ideologiya, politicheskaya praktika [The Russian Revolution. Ideas, ideology, political practice]. Moscow: Letnii sad.
Petrov, Yu.A. (Ed.). (2017). Rossiiskaya revolyutsiya 1917 goda: Vlast, obshchestvo, kultura [The Russian Revolution of 1917: Power, society, culture]. In two vols. Moscow: Politicheskaya entsiklopediya.
Piontkovskii, S.A. (1923). Oktyabrskaya revolyutsiya v Rossii, ee predposylki i khod. Populyarno-istoricheskii ocherk [The Bolshevik Revolution in Russia, its preconditions and events. Popular history essay]. Moscow; Petrograd: Gosudarstvennoe izdatelstvo.
Plekhanov, G.V. (1925). Osnovnye voprosy marksizma [The main issues of Marxism]. Kursk: Sovetskaya derevnya.
Rutkevich, M.N., & Loifman, I.Ya. (1994). Dialektika i teoriya poznaniya [The dialectics and theory of cognition]. Moscow: Mysl.
Shubin, A.V. (2009). Dolgii put k sotsializmu. Tri vyzova marksistskoi traditsii [A long way to socialism. Three challenges to the Marxist tradition]. In A. A. Sorokin (Ed.), Oktyabr 1917: Vyzovy dlya XXI veka (pp. 121-133). Moscow: LENAND.
Tugarinov, V.P. (1958). Obshchestvennoe bytie [Social existence]. Leningrad: Izdatelstvo LGU.
Vipper, R.Yu. (1921). Krizis istoricheskoi nauki [The crisis of historical science]. Kazan: Gosudarstvennoe izdatelstvo.
Zhuravlev, V.V. (1961). Marksizm-leninizm ob otnositelnoi samostoyatelnosti obshchestvennogo soznaniya [Marxism-Leninism about relative independence of public consciousness]. Moscow: Vysshaya shkola.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.21902/Revrima.v4i37.6085
Apontamentos
- Não há apontamentos.
Revista Relações Internacionais do Mundo Atual e-ISSN: 2316-2880
Rua Chile, 1678, Rebouças, Curitiba/PR (Brasil). CEP 80.220-181
