*1851se22:Herzen,Alexander| “Letter to Jules Michelet”| (( SOURCE = http://www.stetson.edu/departments/russian/herzen.html

We consider it an obligation to raise our voice when a person who enjoys such enormous and deserved authority as you do affirms that "Russia does not exist, Russians are not people and they are devoid of moral sensibility." The Russian people, dear sir, are alive, healthy and even not very old, in fact, very young. People do die in youth, but this is not normal. The past of the Russian people is dark and genuinely horrid. But they do have a right to a future. They do not believe in their current condition and they dare to expect more than the past has given to them. The most difficult time for the Russian people is drawing to a close. A fearful struggle awaits them and their enemies are preparing for it. The great question, "To be or not to be," soon will be decided for Russia.

Some talk only about an almighty tsar, about governmental arbitrariness, about the slavish spirit on the part of those who are suppressed. Others affirm, to the contrary, that Petersburg imperialism is not indigenous, that the people, downtrodden by the dual despotism of government and landowners, bears its yoke but is not reconciled with it, that it is not destroyed, only unfortunate, but at the same time that this very people gives unity and force to the colossal tsarism which suppresses it. Others add that the Russian people is a contemptible rabble of drunks and swindlers; others affirm that Russia is populated by a capable and richly gifted native people.

Centralization is alien to the Slavic soul. Federalism is much more natural to its character. Only when it is combined into a union of free and autonomous nations will the Slavic world finally arrive at its true historical existence. Its past may be viewed only as birth, preparation, and cleansing. The historic state form in which the Slavs lived did not correspond to their inner national requirements, requirements that were unformed, instinctive, if you will, but nevertheless showing an extraordinary vitaliy and much promise for the future.

You continue: "The Russians lack the essential sign of humanity, a moral instinct, a sense of good and evil. Truth and justice have no meaning for them. When you speak about these things they are silent; they smile but they do not know what these words mean." And who are these Russians with whom you have spoken? What kinds of conceptions of truth and justice would seem incomprehensible to them? This is not a superfluous question.

Of what, finally, do you accuse the Russian people? What is the essence of your indictment? "Russians," you say, "lie and steal, they continually steal and continually lie and this in a completely naive way. This is their nature."

I will overlook the extreme character of your indictment, but I will raise just one simple question: whom do they deceive? whom do they defraud? Who else but the landowner, the bureaucrat, the administrator, the police -- in a word, the sworn enemies of the peasant, whom they consider to be infidels, apostates, and papists. When they have been robbed of all means of defense they mislead their tormentors and deceive them, and they are quite justified in doing this.

The naturally carefree and lazy Russian peasant, who has been alienated from personal ownership of land, as you correctly noted, has little by little been ensnared in the web of westernized bureaucracy and the power of the landowners. He has submitted to this dehumanizing evil obediently, but he does not trust the rules of the landowners nor the laws of the courts nor the legitimacy of the executive authority. He submits, he endures -- but this has nothing to do with anything that happens outside of the village commune.

The tsar’s name still arouses in the people a superstitous sympathy; the people do not do homage before Tsar Nicholas but before the abstract idea, the myth; in the national imagination the tsar represents an awesome protector, the quintescence of justice, and their earthly provider.

After the tsar only the clergy could have such influence upon Orthodox Russia. It alone represents old Rus in the spheres of government. The clergy does not shave and still remains on the side of the people. But monks and the higher clergy, who deal exclusively with the next life, care little about the people. And the lower clergy (parish priests) suffer the consequences of poverty, drunkenness and their close associations with the police. Here the people respect the idea, but not the person.

Except for the tsar and clergy, all elements of the state and higher society are completely alien and hostile to the people. The peasant finds himself, literally, outside the law. The court will not defend him and his entire participation in the existing order of things consists only in the taxes which weigh heavily upon him and which he pays by sweat and blood. Outcast by all, he understands instinctively that the entire administration is structured to his disadvantage, not to his benefit and that the task of the government and the landowners consists entirely of finding ways to wrest from him more labor, army recruits, and money. Since he understands this and he has a clever mind, he deceives them always and everywhere. It couldn’t be otherwise; if he spoke the truth he would be recognizing their authority over him; and if he did not defraud them then he would be recognizing the legitimacy of their demands, the rights of the landowners, and the justice of the courts.

It’s worth taking a look at the Russian peasant in court in order fully to understand his situation; it’s worth seeing his downcast face, his frightened appearance, in order to understand that he is a prisoner-of-war before a military council, a wayfarer confronted by a band of thieves.

The life of the Russian people hitherto has been confined to the commune. Only in relationship with the commune and its members does he recognize any rights and obligations. Outside the commune everything seems to him to be based upon compulsion. To lie to the judge seems more honest than to give hypocritical respect to his oath. The people respect only that in which they perceive their understanding of law and justice.

Anyone who is well acquainted with the Russian people knows for a certainty that the peasants rarely deceive each other. Among themselves almost unqualified trust reigns and they know nothing about written contracts or conditions. Questions concerning the drawing of land boundaries are necessarily very complex because of the infinite divisions of land on the basis of tax. But nevertheless business is handled without complaints and legal suits. Landowners and the state thirst for ways to interfere but they cannot find them. Petty disagreements are brought to the judgment of the elders or the commune and their decisions are accepted without question.

It is the same in the labor cooperatives. Cooperatives frequently comprise hundreds of workers, associated for a definite period, for example, a year. After a year the workers share the profits among themselves on the basis of the labor of each and by common agreement. The police never have the satisfaction of interfering in the accounting.

The bonds among the peasants are even closer when it comes not to Orthodox believers but to religious dissenters. From time to time the government carries out a wild assault upon some village of dissenters. Peasants are thrown into prison, exiled, without any reason, without any investigation, without any occasion or need except that the Orthodox clergy demands it and the police need something to do. During these attacks on the dissenters again the character of the Russian peasants is demonstrated, namely the solidarity that holds them together. It’s worth noting how they manage to deceive the police and save their brethren, hide their holy books and sacred vessels, and how they endure without complaint the worst torments.

This characteristic of the Russian character makes police investigations extremely difficulty. It is impossible not to take heart from this. The Russian peasant has no morality except that which emerges instinctively, naturally from his communism. This morality is profoundly national.

The commune saved the Russian people from Mongol barbarism and from imperial civilization, from the europeanized landowners and from the germanized bureaucrats. The communal organization, even though it has been greatly shaken, has resisted the interference of the authorities. It has happily survived until socialism has emerged in Europe. The people and the state have nothing in common; in the very least outburst from the people the government sees signs of the fearsome appearance of revolution. The only goal of tsarism remains tsarism. It rules in order to rule. Enormous energy is spent on suppression and on the preservation of an artificial order.

It is very fortunate for Russia that the peasant commune has not perished, that personal property has not replaced common property. It is very fortunate for the Russia people that it has remained outside all political movements and outside European civilization which, without doubt, would have destroyed the commune.

*1853:Herzen,Alexander| “Yur’ev den’! Yur’ev den’! russkomu dvorianstvu”| GRV:176-81 | ((HznA prc| Let this first vol’noe russkoe slovo iz-za granicy pust’ budet obraweno k vam [russkomu dvoryanstvu]. You are the source of all mental activity of the past century. Mejdu vami naxoditsya to samootverjennoe men’winnstvo, kotorym iskupaetsya Rossiya v glazax drugix narodov i v sobstvennyx svoix. Iz vawix ryadov vywli Murav’ev i Pestel’, Ryleev i Bestujev. Iz vawix ryadov vywli Puwkin i Lermonto. Nakonec, i my, ostavivwie rodinu, dlya togo qtob xot’ vquje razdavalas’ svobodnaya russkaya req’, vywli iz vawix ryadov [such humble self placement among these others!!] K vam pervym my i obrawwaemsya. Ne s slovami upreka, ne s nevozmojnym na siyu minutu zovom na boi, a s drujeskoyu req’yu ob obwwem gore, ob obwwem styde i s bratskim sovetom. Gorestno, stydno byt rabami, no vsego gorestnee i bol’nee soznavat’, qto rabstvo nawe neobxodimo, qto ono v poryadke vewwei, qto ono estestvennoe sledstvie. Na nawei duwe lejit velikii grex, my ego unasledovali i v etom ne vinovaty, no my uderjivaem nepravo unasledovannoe, ono styagivaet nas, kak tyajelyi kamen’, na dno, i s nim na wee my ne vspyvem. My raby – potomu qto nawi praotcy prodali svoe qelovqeskoe dostoinstvo za neqeloveqeskie prava, a my pol’zuemsya imi. My raby – potomu qto my gospoda. My slugi – potomu qto my pomewwiki, i pomewwiki bez very v nawe pravo.[176/177] My krepostnye – potomu qto derjim v nevole nawix bratii, ravnyx nam po rojdeniyu, po krovi, po yazyku. Net svobody dlya nas, poka proklyhatie krepostnogo sostoyaniya tyagotit nad nami, poka u nas budet suwwestvovat’ gnusnoe, pozornoe, niqem ne opravdanoe rabstvo krest’yan. S Yur’eva dnya naqnetsya novaya jizn’ Rossii, s Yur’eva dnya naqnetsya nawe osvobojdenie. Nel’zya byt’ svobodnym qelovekom i imet’ dvorovyx lyudei, kuplennyx, kak tovar, prodannyx, kak stado. |...| Razve car’ ne mojet skazat’: “Vy xotite byt’ svobodnymi s kakoi stati? Berite obrok s vawix krest’yan, berite ix trud, beritge ix deetei vo dvor, obmerivaite ix zemleyu, prodavaite ix, pokupaite, pereselyaite, beite, sekite ix, -- a esli ustali, posylaite ko mne v policiyu, ya oxotno budu seq’ za vas. Malo vam etogo, qto li? Nadobno qest’ znat’! Predki nawi ustupili vam qast’ nawego samoderjaviya; kabalya vam svobodnyx lyudei, oni otorvali polu carskoi bagryanicy svoei i brosili ee na bednost’ vawim otcam; vy ne mojet otkazalis’ ot nee, vy pokryvaetec’ eyu, jivete pod neyu – kakaya je mojet byt’ mejdu nami req’ o svobode? Ostavaites’ krepki caryu, poka pravoslavnye krepki vam. S qego pomewwikam byt’ svobodnym lyud’mi?” I car’ budet prav. Mnogie iz vas jelali osvobojdeniya krest’yan, Pestel’ i ego druz’ya stavili osvobojdenie ix svoim pervym delom. Sporili snaqala o tom, s zemleyu ili bez zemli dat’ volyu? Potom vse uvideli nelepost’ osvobojdeniya v golod, v brodyajniqestvo, i vopros wel tol’ko o koliqestve zemli i o vozmojnom vozmezdii za nee. [PNZ TAM YAR VLA NNG MVA USA] V samyx pomewwiq’ix guberniyax, v Penze i Tambove, v Yaroslavle i Vladimire, v Nijnem i, nakonec, v Moskve, vopros ob osvobojdenii naxodil soquvstvie i nigde ne vstreqal togo osterveneniya, s kotorym amerikanskie pomewwiki zawwiwayut svoi qernye prava. [TUL] Tul’skoe dvoryanstvo podalo proekt; v desyati drugix guberniyax soverwwalis’, delali predpolojeniya. I vdrug dvoryane i pravitel’stvo perepugalis’, i iz ix drojawwix ruk vypali vse blagie naqinaniya. A boyat’sya bylo vovse neqego; razliv 1848 goda byl sliwkom melok, qtob ponyat’ nawi stepi. S tex por vse zasnulo. Kuda delos’ men’winstvo, kotoroe wumelo v peterburgskix i moskovskix gostinyx ob osvobojdenii krest’yan?.. [sic] [177/178] Qem konqilis’ vse eti komitety, sovewwaniya, proekty, plany, predlojeniya?.. Nawe sonnoe bezdeistvie, vyalaya nevyderjka, stradatel’naya ustupqivost’ navodyat grust’ i otqayanie. S etoi raspuwwennost’yu my dowli do togo, qto pravitel’stvo nas ne gonit, a tol’ko pugaet, i, esli b ne yunoweskaya, polnaya otvagi i bezrassudstva istoriya Petrawevskogo i ego druzei, mojno b bylo podumat’, qto vy poladili s Nikolaem Pavloviqem i jivete s nim duwa v duwu. A mejdu tem, v derevnyax stanovitsya nelovko. Krest’yane posmatrivayut ugryumo. Dvorovye men’we sluwayutsya. Vsyakie vesti brodyat. Tam-to pomewwika s sem’ei sojgli, tam-to ubili drugogo cepami i vilami, tam-to prikazqika zaduwili baby na pole, tam-to kamergera vysekli rozgami i vzyalis nego podpisku molqat’. Krepostnoe sostoyanie yavnym obrazom nadoelo mujikam, oni tol’ko ne umeyut prinyat’sya soobwwa za delo. Vy s svoei storony znaete, qto wagu vpered nel’sya sdelat’ bez osvobojdeniya krest’yan. No ono-to, po sqastiyu, vsego bol’we zavisit ot vas. Zavisit segodnya. My ne znaem, qto budet zavtra. Qego j vy jdete, v samom dele? Razreweniya pravitel’stva? Ono dalo vam kakoi-to lukavyi i dvusmyslennyi namek v 1842 godu. Vy im ne vospol’zovalis’. Da i kakoe tut pozvolenie? Nasil’no zastavit’ vladet’ nevozmojno, qto bylo by tiranstvo soverwenno novogo roda, obratnaya konfiskaciya. Vniknite v nawi slova, poimite ix. Na siyu minutu vy imeete za sebya bol’we nejeli pravo*, fakt vladeniya – vlast’. Tak ili inaqe, no klyuq ot cepi u vas v rukax. Nam kajetsya umnee, rasqetlivee ustupit’, nejeli jdat’ vzryva. Umnee brosit’ za bort dolyu gruza, nejeli dat’ utonut’ vsemu korablyu. [FOOTNOTE * above = Vsyakoe dvoryanstvo na Zapade mojet soslat’sya na kakie-nibud’ slabye, prizraqnye prava vladeniya krest’yanami; u nas i tex net. Ne krov’yu priobrelo russkoe dvoryanstvo rabov, a ryadom policeiskix mer, nizkim potvorstvom carei, plutnyami qinovnikov i besstydnoi alqnost’u svoix praocev.] My ne predlagaem vam, kak Xristos Nikodimu, razdat’ vawe dostoyanie iz samootverjeniya, u nas net vam raya v zamenu za takuyu jertvu. My nanavidim frazy i vovse ne verim v poval’noe velikoduwie, ne v beskorystie celyx soslovii. [sSs] Francuzskoe dvoryanstvo 4-go avgusta 1792 goda postupilo v desyat’ raz bol’we umno, nejeli samootverjenno. Vzves’te, qto vam vygodnee – osvobojdenie krest’yan s zemleyu i s vawim uqastiem ili bor’ba protiv osvobojedniya s uqastiem pravitel’stva? Vzves’te, qto vygodnee – naqat’ soboi novuyu, [178-179] svobodnuyu Rus’ i polyubovno rewit’ tyajelyi vopros s krest’yanami ili naqat’ protiv nix krestovyi poxod s ruj’em v odnoi ruke, s rozgoi v drugoi? Esli est’ tol’ko buduwwnost’ Rusi i miru slavyanskomu – krest’yane budut svobodny... [sic] Ili vovse ne budet Rossii, i sled ee, otmeqennyi nenujnoi krov’yu i dikimi pobedami, isqeznet malo-pomalu, kak sled tatar, kak vtoroi neudaqnyi sloi severnogo naseleniya posle finnov. Gosudarstvo, ne umeyuwwee otdelat’sya ot takogo qernogo grexa, tak gluboko vzowedswego vo vnutrennoe stroenie ego, ne imeet prava ni na obrazovanie, ne na razvitie, ne na uqastie v dele istorii. No ne vy ne verite takoi strawnoi buduwwnosti, ne Ya. I vy i ya – my quvstvuem i znaem, qto osvobojdenie krest’yan neobxodimo, neotrazimo, nemunuemo. Esli vy ne sumeete niqego sdelat’, oni vse-taki budut svobodny – po carskoi milosti ili po milosti pugaqevwwiny. V oboix sluqayax vy pogibli, a s vami i to obrazovanie, do kotorogo vy dorabotalis’ trudnym putem, oskorbitel’nym unijeniyami i bol’wimi nepravdami.
Bol’no, esli osvobojdenie vyidet iz Zimnego dvorca, vlast’ carskaya opravdaetsya im pered narodom i, razdavivwi vas, sil’nee ukrepit svoe samovlastie, nejeli kogda-libo.
Strawna i pugaqevwwina, no, skajem otkrovenno, esli osvobojdenie krest’yan ne mojet by kupleno inaqe, to i togda ono ne dorogo kupleno. Strawnye prestupleniya vlekut za soboi strawnye posledstviya.
Eta budet odna iz tex groznyx istoriqeskix bed, kotorye predvidet’ i izbegnut’ zablagovremenno mojno, no ot kotoryx spastis’ v minutu razgroma trudno ili sovsem nel’zya.
Vy qitali istoriyu pugaqevskogo bunta, vy slyxali rasskazy o starorusskom vosstanii.
Nawe serdce oblivaetsya krov’yu pri mysli o nevinnyx jertvax, my vpered ix oplakivaem, no, sklonyaya golovu, skajem: pust’ soverwaetsya strawnaya sud’ba, kotoruyu predupredit’ ne umeli ili ne xoteli.
Esli by my dumali, qto eta qawa neotvratima, my ne obratilis’ by k vam, nawi slova byli by togda prazdny ili poxodili by za neumestnuyu i zluyu nasmewku.
Sovsem naprotiv, my uvereny, qto net nikakoi rokovoi neobxodimost, qtob kajdyi wag vpered dlya naroda byl otmeqen grudami trupov. Krewwenie krov’yu – velikoe delo, no my ne razdelyaem svirepoi very, qto vsyakoe osvobojdenie, vyakii uspex doljen nepremenno proiti qerez nego.
Neujeli groznye uroki bylogo vsegda budut nemy? [179/180]
I kogo mojet luqwe pouqat’ prowedwee i nastoyawwee, kak ne vas: vy zriteli, vy smotrite sloja ruki na groznuyu bor’bu, soverwayuwwuyusya v Evrope [...]
Uqites’, poka ewwe est’ vremya.
My ewwe verim v vas, vy dali zalogi, nawe serdce ix ne zabylo, vot poqemu my ne obrawwaemsya pryamo k nesqastnym brat’yam nawim dlya togo, qtob sosqitat’ im ix sily, kotoryx oni ne znayut, ukazat’ im sredstva, o kotoryx oni ne dogadyvayutsya, rastolkovat’ im vawu slabost’ kotoruyu oni ne opodozrevayut, dlya togo, qtob skazat’ im:
“Nu, bratcy, k toporam teper’. Ne vek nam byt v kreposti, ne vek xodit’ na barwwinu da slujit’ vo dvore; postoimte za svyatuyu volyu, dovol’no natewilis’ nad nami gospoda, dovol’no oskvernili doqerei nawix, dovol’no oblomali palok ob rebra starikov... Nutka, detuwki, solomy, solomy k gospodskomu domu, pust’ bariqi pogreyutsya v poslednii raz!”
Vmesto etoi reqi my vam govorim: predupredite bol’wie bedstviya, poka eto v vawei vole.
Spasite sebya ot krepostnogo prava i krest’yan ot toi krovi, kotoruyu oni doljny budut prolit’.
Pojaleite detei svoix, pojaleite sovest’ bednogo naroda russkogo.
No toropites’ – vremya stradnoe, ni odnogo qasa teryat’ nel’zya.
Goryaqee dyxanie bol’noi, vybivweisya iz sil Evropy veet na Rus’ perevorotom. Car’ otgorodil vas zaborom, no v kazennom zabore ego est’ wweli i skvoznoi veter sil’nee vol’nogo.
Nastupayuwwii perevorot ne tak qujd russkomu serdcu, kak prejnie. Slovo socializm neizvestno nawemu narodu, no smysl ego blizok duwe russkogo qeloveka, izjivayuwwego vek svoi v sel’skoi obwwine i v rabotniqeskoi arteli.
V socializme vstretitsya Rus’ s revolyuciei.
Takix okeaniqeskix potokov nel’zya v samom dele ostanovit’ tamojennymi merami i rozgami [...] Postoronites’, esli ne xotite byt’ potoplennymi, ili plyvite po teqeniyu. [...]
Mojet, te iz vas, kotorye ne xotyat osvobojdenya, dumayut, qto car’ pomojet im v razgrome.
Oni privykli k svirepym voennym usmireniyam, oni privykli k roli palaqa, kotoruyu pravitel’stvo tak oxotno beret na sebya po trebovaniyu pomewwika. Oni privykli k ego prestupnoi gluxote k krest’yanskim jalobam i ego pozornomu potvorstvu protivuzakonnym prodajam, qrezmernym podatyam, nasil’stvennomu upotrebleniyu krest’yan vne derevni. [...]
Byt’ mojet, v samom dele car’ pomojet temi sredstvami, kotorymi ego blagoslovennyi predwestvennik pomog vvedeniyu voennyx poselenii, zasekaya do smerti desyatogo, dvadcatogo qeloveka... Mojet... [180/181]
No esli vy vospol’zuetes’ s nimi vmeste carskoi zawwitoi, togda smotrite vedite sebya xorowo i smirno; zabud’te vsyakoe qeloveqeskoe dostoinstvo, i req’ skol’ko-nibud’ svobodnuyu, i meqtu o liqnoi nezavisimosti, bud’te togda vernopoddannymi i tol’ko vernopoddannymi.
Ne to, vspomnite, esli yurodivyi avstriiskii imperator, otrewennyi ot del za nesposobnost’ nawel sredstvo unyat’ galickix pomewwikov [...] -- qto s vami sdelayut Nikolai Pavlovich i ego deti?))