Pavlograd is an industrial city in eastern Ukraine, located within the Dnipropetrovsk Oblast. Administratively, Pavlohrad is incorporated as the town of oblast significance and serves as the administrative center of Pavlohrad Raion which it does not belong to, its population is 107,742 . The rivers of Vovcha, Kocherha flow through Pavlohrad; the area of the city is 59.3 square kilometres. There are 1 lyceum in the city. Pavlohrad is one of the oldest settlements in Dnipropetrovsk oblast; the first references to it are from the 17th century. At the beginning of the 1770s Zaporozhian Cossack Matvii Khizhnyak built winter quarters, which soon became known as sloboda Matviivka. In 1779 Matveevka was renamed to Luhanske, as the latter became headquarters of the Luhansk pikemen regiment headed by M. I. Golinishchev-Kutuzov. With the establishment of Yekaterinoslav Viceroyalty, named in honor of Paul І, became a part of this administrative unit as a district town. In 1784 Pavlohrad received city status. There were 2419 inhabitants in the city at the end of 18th century.
The citizens of Pavlograd lived in daub. The first stone building was Svyato-Vosnesensky Cathedral on Soborna ploshcha; the first blazon of the city was affirmed on July 29, 1811, the second one on September 26, 1979. The first citizens were Kalmiussky Palanki and demobilized military; the city plan was created by Scottish architect W. Geste and was affirmed by emperor Nicholas I on July 31, 1831. In 1871 local merchant A. K. Shalin was elected the first head of the city; the central street was named after him. Merchant of ІІ Guild A. V. Permanin was elected as city governor in 1892. Under his leadership the city started to develop rapidly: a lot of churches, barracks, gymnasiums and plants were built. In 1896, "Earl's Theatre" was built by the Golenishchev-Kutuzov family. In the 1870s a railway was built between St. Simferopol, passing through Pavlohrad. In 1930 there was an uprising against Soviet rule in Pavlohrad. From 1780 to 1941, a significant Jewish community existed in the city; the pre-Holocaust Jewish population was 4,000.
The city was destroyed during Nazi occupation in 1941. During the Holocaust, a concentration camp was located in Pavlohrad and a large part of the community died during the war and during the mass executions; the Pavlohrad Jewish cemetery contains not only Jewish, but Christian burials, which were agreed to by the leaders of the local Jewish community in 1995. On May 22, 2011, it was reported that unknown persons desecrated the cemetery in the town - tombstones were turned over and broken as what seems to be an anti-Semitic act; the city is home to Pavlohrad Mechanical Plant, established in December 1963 as a specialized production facility of the Plant no. 586. PMZ is a factory dedicated to assembly and production of solid-fueled rocket engines and missiles. By 1975 PMZ became the largest solid-rocket factory within the Ministry of General Machine Building of USSR. PMZ made fuel tanks for booster rockets and plastic ICBM rocket motor casings. Pavlohrad is twinned with: Lubsko, Poland San Sebastián, Spain The murder of the Jews of Pavlohrad during World War II, at Yad Vashem website
The February Revolution, known in Soviet historiography as the February Bourgeois Democratic Revolution and sometimes as the March Revolution, was the first of two revolutions which took place in Russia in 1917. The main events of the revolution took place in and near Petrograd, the then-capital of Russia, where long-standing discontent with the monarchy erupted into mass protests against food rationing on 23 February Old Style. Revolutionary activity lasted about eight days, involving mass demonstrations and violent armed clashes with police and gendarmes, the last loyal forces of the Russian monarchy. On 27 February O. S. mutinous Russian Army forces sided with the revolutionaries. Three days Tsar Nicholas II abdicated, ending Romanov dynastic rule and the Russian Empire. A Russian Provisional Government under Prince Georgy Lvov replaced the Council of Ministers of Russia; the revolution appeared to break out without formal planning. Russia had been suffering from a number of economic and social problems, which compounded after the start of World War I in 1914.
Disaffected soldiers from the city's garrison joined bread rioters women in bread lines, industrial strikers on the streets. As more and more troops deserted, with loyal troops away at the Front, the city fell into chaos, leading to the overthrow of the Tsar. In all, over 1,300 people were killed during the protests of February 1917. A number of factors contributed to both short and long term. Historians disagree on the main factors. Liberal historians emphasise the turmoil created by the war, whereas Marxists emphasise the inevitability of change. Alexander Rabinowitch summarises the main long-term and short-term causes: The February 1917 revolution... grew out of pre-war political and economic instability, technological backwardness, fundamental social divisions, coupled with gross mismanagement of the war effort, continuing military defeats, domestic economic dislocation, outrageous scandals surrounding the monarchy. Despite its occurrence at the height of World War I, the roots of the February Revolution date further back.
Chief among these was Imperial Russia's failure, throughout the 19th and early 20th century, to modernise its archaic social and political structures while maintaining the stability of ubiquitous devotion to an autocratic monarch. As historian Richard Pipes writes, "the incompatibility of capitalism and autocracy struck all who gave thought to the matter"; the first major event of the Russian Revolution was the February Revolution, a chaotic affair, caused by the culmination of over a century of civil and military unrest. There were many causes of this unrest of the common people towards the Tsar and aristocratic landowners; the causes can be summarized as the ongoing cruel treatment of peasants by the bourgeoisie, poor working conditions of industrial workers and the spreading of western democratic ideas by political activists. All of these causes led to a growing social awareness in the lower classes of Russia. Dissatisfaction of proletarians was compounded by military failures. In 1905, Russia experienced humiliating losses in its war with Japan Bloody Sunday and the Revolution of 1905, in which Tsarist troops fired upon a peaceful, unarmed crowd.
These events further divided Nicholas II from his people. Widespread strikes and the famous mutiny on the Battleship Potemkin ensued; these conditions caused much agitation among professional classes. This tension erupted into general revolt with the 1905 Revolution, again under the strain of war in 1917, this time with lasting consequences; the revolution was provoked by Russian military failures during the First World War, as well as public dissatisfaction with the way the country was run on the home front. The economic challenges faced due to fighting a total war contributed. In August 1914, all classes supported and all political deputies voted in favour of the war; the declaration of war was followed by a revival of nationalism across Russian society, which temporarily reduced internal strife. The army achieved some early victories but suffered major defeats, notably Tannenberg in August 1914, the Winter Battle in Masuria in February 1915 and the loss of Russian Poland during May to August 1915.
Nearly six million casualties—dead and missing—had been accrued by January 1917. Mutinies sprang up more morale was at its lowest, the newly called up officers and commanders were at times incompetent. Like all major armies, Russia's armed forces had inadequate supply; the pre-revolution desertion rate ran at around 34,000 a month. Meanwhile, the wartime alliance of industry and Stavka started to work outside the Tsar's control. In an attempt to boost morale and repair his reputation as a leader, Nicholas announced in the summer of 1915 that he would take personal command of the army, in defiance of universal advice to the contrary; the result was disastrous on three grounds. Firstly, it associated the monarchy with the unpopular war; this left the reins of power to his wife, the German Tsarina Alexandra, unpopular and accused of being a spy and under the thumb of her confidant, Grigori Rasputin, himse
People's Rights Party
The People's Rights Party, was a radical constitutionalist political party established in Tsarist Russia in 1893. The group's political leader was the agrarian populist Mark Natanson and its ideological leading light was the literary critic and public affairs commentator N. K. Mikhailovsky. While the People's Rights Party was small and short-lived owing to repression by the Tsarist political police, it has been remembered for its transitional place between the 19th Century Russian populist movement and a key 20th Century political organization, the Socialist Revolutionary Party. At the end of the 1870s the Russian agrarian populist underground political party Zemlya i Volya split over the question of tactics between those who advocated direct education and agitation among the peasantry and urban workers and the maintenance of student study circles and those who advocated the use of terrorism against high officials in the Tsarist regime — up to and including the Tsar himself — in order to create conditions for an instantaneous revolutionary upheaval.
Those who advocated the agitational approach organized as Chërnyi Peredel and were arrested or driven into exile after being identified by the police. Those pursuing revolutionary terrorism formed their own group, Narodnaya Volya and managed to realize a primary objective when in March 1881 they assassinated Tsar Alexander II with a bomb. No revolution followed, only harsh repression ending in the execution of a number of prominent Narodnaya Volya members and the obliteration of the underground organization by 1884. Following the annihilation of Narodnaya Volya there followed nearly a decade of political disillusionment and inactivity among the Russian revolutionary intelligentsia; the devastating Famine of 1891-1892 did not stir the peasantry to revolt against the Tsarist regime — although the crisis did play a part in moving urban intellectuals in Russia to resume political activity in an effort to bring about an end to autocratic rule. One of the leading manifestations of this new political offensive was the establishment of the People's Rights Party in 1893.
The People's Rights Party was founded in the summer of 1893 in the Russian city of Saratov. The group was composed of a small core of active members but influenced a much broader network of sympathizers and supporters. Leader of the party was veteran agrarian socialist Mark Natanson and two of his personal friends and political co-thinkers, Nikolai Tyutchev and Osip Aptekman, none of whom had been members of Narodnaya Volya; these were joined in sympathy, albeit not in formal membership, by agrarian populist Nikolai Mikhailovsky and a group of his associates from the journal Russkoe Bogatstvo, V. G. Korolenko, N. F. Anensky, A. V. Peshekonov; the group's leading supporter in Moscow was former study circle leader A. I. Ryazanov, while non-party sympathizers counted among their numbers the historian V. Ia. Bogucharsky. An illegal organization in Russia, the People's Rights Party established an underground printing press in Smolensk, by means of which it produced its publications. Owing to limited circulation only two of the party's publications have survived — the party's program and a single pamphlet, Nasushchnyi Vopros.
The People's Rights Party advocated that a broad alliance of radicals should be cobbled together around a single central goal, the overthrow of Tsarist autocracy, with all controversial goals and objectives set aside until that fundamental task was realized. The group sought to make a break from what it called "the decayed ideas of populism," efforts to extend culture, petty political reforms, to make a decisive break with "the condescending worship of the mythical'people'" and to concentrate instead upon "the struggle for political liberty" as the means to overthrow absolutism. In the estimation of historian Shmuel Galai, the programmatic originality of the People's Rights Party lay not in its setting down of political liberty as a goal of the organization —, stated as an objective by other radical populist organizations — but its intimation that the adoption of the methods of liberal democracy would be the means to that end as well. Citing the group's program, Galai has asserted that "for the first time in the annals of Russian parties, it declared organized public opinion to be the main weapon in the struggle against autocracy," in contradistinction to peasant revolt, general strike, or terror.
The People's Rights Party's program called for adoption for all of policies extending "the rights of citizen and man," which were to include: Representative government on the basis of universal suffrage. The publication of the group's program, written in the form of a manifesto, on February 19, 1894, escalated the situation from the perspective of the authorities. A coordinated raid was organized and executed on the morning of April 21, 1894, with simultaneous arrests made in five cities, including the group's headquarters city of Orël, St. Petersburg, Kharkov, as well as Smolensk, location of the party's secret press. A total of 52 arrests we
Constantin Dobrogeanu-Gherea was a Romanian Marxist theorist, sociologist, literary critic, journalist. He was an entrepreneur in the city of Ploiești. Constantin Dobrogeanu-Gherea was the father of communist activist Alexandru Dobrogeanu-Gherea and of philosopher Ionel Gherea. Constantin Dobrogeanu-Gherea was born in Yekaterinoslav Governorate of the Russian Empire to Ukrainian Jewish Katz family. After studies at Kharkiv University, Dobrogeanu-Gherea fled persecution by the Okhrana and settled in Iași, he was active in socialist politics, giving shape to the first centers of activism in Romania, contributed to left-wing magazines such as Contemporanul. The group centered on Dobrogeanu-Gherea became the most preeminent one to form the Romanian Social-Democratic Workers' Party. While the idea did exist before Dobrogeanu-Gherea, he strengthened Narodist thought within Romania, to have a crucial contribution to the emergence of Poporanism. Constantin Dobrogeanu-Gherea amended the aesthetical guidelines of Junimea and its most important voice, Titu Maiorescu.
To the Junimea vision of art for art's sake, created through the merger of moment and authentic feeling, he added conditioning through social necessities. Maiorescu had been a critic of forms without substance, but he had shown himself skeptical to the notion that art could be directed to serve a political purpose, he wrote extensive studies on literary figures, engaged in vivid polemics with many of his contemporaries. Dobrogeanu-Gherea had a lifelong friendship with Ion Luca Caragiale, giving an interpretation of his works through parallels established with writers of his generation in other cultures. For example, he compared Caragiale's short story An Easter Torch, a reflection on the brutal outcome of anti-Semitism, with writings by Fyodor Dostoevsky; the two exchanged letters for a large part of their lives: while never a socialist, Caragiale admired Dobrogenu-Gherea's attitudes and used his critique of Romanian society in the writing of his work 1907. From Spring to Autumn. Alongside small-scale works on dialectical materialism, Dobrogeanu-Gherea published his most debated volume, the 1910 Neoiobăgia.
The work argued that Romania was trapped in feudalism, with the minimum of capitalist vehicles present only to ensure an easier exploitation of the peasantry by the social élite. According to Dobrogenu-Gherea, the land reform carried out under Alexandru Ioan Cuza had only procrastinated a dramatic outcome. In 1915, Leon Trotsky, citing Dobrogeanu-Gherea alongside Christian Rakovsky as a major figure of socialism in Romania, commented on Neo-Serfdom's conclusions: "All the contradictions of the social and political life of Rumania: the bondage of the peasants, judicially repealed but resurrected by the logic of economic relations. Dobrogeanu-Gherea's works were adopted by the Romanian Communist Party. However, few of Dobrogeanu-Gherea's writings could be said to advocate political revolution, all of them fit in the patterns of reformism. In 1948, he was posthumously made a member of the Romanian Academy. Profile of Gherea by Trotsky at Marxists.org Archive of Constantin Dobrogeanu-Gherea Papers at the International Institute of Social History
Social change involves alteration of the social order of a society. It may include changes in social behaviours or social relations. Social change may refer to the notion of social progress or sociocultural evolution, the philosophical idea that society moves forward by evolutionary means, it may refer to a paradigmatic change in the socio-economic structure, for instance a shift away from feudalism and towards capitalism. Accordingly, it may refer to social revolution, such as the Socialist revolution presented in Marxism, or to other social movements, such as Women's suffrage or the Civil rights movement. Social change may be driven by cultural, economic, scientific or technological forces. Change comes from two sources. One source is random or unique factors such as climate, weather, or the presence of specific groups of people. Another source is systematic factors. For example, successful development has the same general requirements, such as a stable and flexible government, enough free and available resources, a diverse social organization of society.
On the whole, social change is a combination of systematic factors along with some random or unique factors. There are many theories of social change. A theory of change should include elements such as structural aspects of change and mechanisms of social change, directions of change. Hegelian: The classic Hegelian dialectic model of change is based on the interaction of opposing forces. Starting from a point of momentary stasis, Thesis countered by Antithesis first yields conflict it subsequently results in a new Synthesis. Marxist: Marxism presents a dialectical and materialist concept of history. Kuhnian: The philosopher of science, Thomas Kuhn argues in The Structure of Scientific Revolutions with respect to the Copernican Revolution that people are to continue utilizing an unworkable paradigm until a better paradigm is accepted. Heraclitan: The Greek philosopher Heraclitus used the metaphor of a river to speak of change thus, "On those stepping into rivers staying the same other and other waters flow".
What Heraclitus seems to be suggesting here interpretations notwithstanding, is that, in order for the river to remain the river, change must be taking place. Thus one may think of the Heraclitan model as parallel to that of a living organism, which, in order to remain alive, must be changing. A contemporary application of this approach is shown in the social change theory SEED-SCALE which builds off of the complexity theory subfield of Emergence. Daoist: The Chinese philosophical work Dao De Jing, I.8 and II.78 uses the metaphor of water as the ideal agent of change. Water, although soft and yielding, will wear away stone. Change in this model is to be natural and steady, albeit imperceptible. One of the most obvious changes occurring is the change in the relative global population distribution between countries. In the recent decades, developing countries became a larger proportion of world population, increasing from 68% in 1950 to 82% in 2010, while population of the developed countries has declined from 32% of total world population in 1950 to 18% in 2010.
China and India continue to be the largest countries, followed by the US as a distant third. However, population growth throughout the world is slowing. Population growth among developed countries has been slowing since the 1950s, is now at 0.3% annual growth. Population growth among the less developed countries excluding the least developed has been slowing, since 1960, is now at 1.3% annual growth. Population growth among the least developed countries has slowed little, is the highest at 2.7% annual growth. In much of the developed world, changes from distinct men's work and women's work to more gender equal patterns have been economically important since the mid-20th century. Both men and women are considered to be great contributors to social change worldwide. Eisenstadt, SN. Tradition and Modernity. Krieger Publishing. Giddens, Anthony. Sociology. Cambridge: Polity Press. Haralambos and Holborn, Martin. Sociology: Themes and Perspectives. London: HarperCollins. ISBN 0007245955 Harper, CL. Exploring Social Change.
New Jersey: Engelwood Cliffs. Oesterdiekhoff, Georg W.. "The Role of Developmental Psychology to Understanding History and Social Change". Journal of Social Sciences. 10: 185–195. Doi:10.3844/jssp.2014.185.195. Polanyi, Karl.. The Great Transformation. New York: Farrar & Rinehart. Tilly, Charles.. "Misreading Rereading, Nineteenth-Century Social Change." Pp. 332–58 in Social Structures: A Network Approach, eds. Barry Wellman and S. D. Berkowitz. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Tilly, Charles.. Social Movements, 1768-2004. Boulder, CO: Paradigm Publishers. ISBN 1-59451-043-1. Vago, Steven.. Social Change, 4th ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. ISBN 0-13-679416-5. Understanding The World Today – Reports about global social, economic and technological change. Social Change Collection from Georgia State University
Narodnaya Volya was a 19th-century revolutionary political organization in the Russian Empire which conducted targeted killing of government officials in attempt to promote reforms in the country. The organization declared itself to be a populist movement. Composed of young revolutionary socialist intellectuals believing in the efficacy of terrorism, Narodnaya Volya emerged in Autumn 1879 from the split of an earlier revolutionary organization called Zemlya i Volya. Based upon an underground apparatus of local, semi-independent cells co-ordinated by a self-selecting Executive Committee, Narodnaya Volya continued to espouse acts of revolutionary violence in an attempt to spur mass revolt against Tsarism, culminating in the successful assassination of Tsar Alexander II in March 1881—the event for which the group is best remembered, it favored the use of secret society-led terrorism as an attempt to violently destabilize the Russian Empire and provide a focus for popular discontent against it for an insurrection, justified “as a means of exerting pressure on the government for reform, as the spark that would ignite a vast peasant uprising, as the inevitable response to the regime's use of violence against the revolutionaries”.
The group developed ideas—such as targeted killing of the'leaders of oppression'—that were to become the hallmark of subsequent violence by small non-state groups, they were convinced that the developing technologies of the age—such as the invention of dynamite, of which they were the first anarchist group to have made widespread—enabled them to strike directly and with discrimination. Much of the organization's philosophy was inspired by Sergey Nechayev and "propaganda by the deed"-proponent Carlo Pisacane; the group served as inspiration and forerunner for other revolutionary socialist and anarchist organizations that followed, including in particular the Russian Socialist Revolutionary Party. The emancipation of the serfs in 1861 did not end the state of grim rural poverty in Russia, the autocracy headed by the Tsar of Russia and the nobles around him, as well as the privileged state bureaucracy, remained in firm control of the nation's economy from which it extracted pecuniary benefits.
By the beginning of decade of the 1870s, dissent regarding the established political and economic order had begun to take concrete form among many members of the intelligentsia, which sought to foster a modern and democratic society in Russia in place of the economic backwardness and political repression which marked the old regime. A set of "populist" values became commonplace among these radical intellectuals seeking change of the Russian economic and political form; the Russian peasantry, based as it was upon its historic village governing structure, the peasant commune, its collective holding and periodic redistribution of farmland, was held to be inherently socialistic, or at least fundamentally amenable to socialist organization. It was further believed that this fact made possible a unique path for the modernization of Russia which bypassed the industrial poverty, a feature of early capitalism in Western Europe—the region to which Russian intellectuals looked for inspiration and by which they measured the comparatively backwards state of their own polity.
Moreover, the radical intelligentsia believed it axiomatic that individuals and the nation had the power to control their own destiny and that it was the moral duty of enlightened civil society to transform the nation by leading the peasantry in mass revolt that would transform Russia to a socialist society. These ideas were regarded by most radical intellectuals of the era as nearly incontestable, the byproduct of decades of observation and thought dating back to the conservative Slavophiles and sketched out by such disparate writers as Alexander Herzen, Pyotr Lavrov, Mikhail Bakunin. Socialist study circles began to emerge in Russia during the decade of the 1870s, populated by idealistic students in major urban centers such as St. Petersburg, Moscow and Odessa; these tended to have a loose organizational structure and localized, bound together by the personal familiarity of participants with one another. Efforts to propagandize revolutionary and socialist ideas among factory workers and peasants were met with state repression, with the Tsarist secret police identifying and jailing agitators.
In the spring of 1874 a mass movement of "going to the people" began, with young intellectuals taking jobs in rural villages as teachers, doctors, masons, or common farm laborers, attempting to immerse themselves in the peasants' world so as to better inculcate them with socialist and revolutionary ideas. Fired with messianic zeal 2,000 people left for rural posts in the spring; the failure of this movement, marked by a rejection of political arguments by the peasantry and easy arrests of public speakers by local authorities and the Okhrana influenced the revolutionary movement in years to follow. The need for stealth and secrecy and more aggressive measures seemed to have been made clear. Following the failure of the 1874 effort at "going to the people", revolutionary populism congealed around what would be the strongest such organization of the decade, Zemlya i Volya, the prototype of a new type of centralized political organization which attempted to muster and direct every potential aspect of urban and rural disco
The Narodniks were a politically conscious movement of the Russian middle class in the 1860s and 1870s, some of whom became involved in revolutionary agitation against tsarism. Their ideology was known as Narodnichestvo, from the Russian народ, narod, "people, folk", so it is sometimes translated as "peopleism" or, more "populism". A common slogan among the Narodniks was "хождение в народ", meaning "going to the people". Though their movement achieved little in its own time, the Narodniks were in many ways the intellectual and political forebears of the socialists-revolutionaries who went on to influence Russian history in the 20th century; the Narodnik position was held by intellectuals who read the works of Alexander Herzen and of Nikolay Gavrilovich Chernyshevsky, whose convictions were refined by Nikolay Mikhaylovsky. In the late 19th century and capitalism were becoming the primary theories of Russian political thought, Mikhaylovsky, realizing this shift in thought, began to tweak his original ideas of Narodnism, such that two groups of Narodniks emerged: the so-called "Critical Narodniks" and "Doctrinaire Narodniks".
Critical Narodniks followed Mikhaylovsky, assumed a flexible stance on capitalism, whilst adhering to their basic orientation. The more well-known Doctrinaire Narodniks had a firm belief that capitalism had no future in Russia or in any agrarian country. Narodnism arose after the emancipation of the serfs in 1861 under Tsar Alexander II, which signalled the end of feudalism in Russia. Arguing that freed serfs were being sold into wage slavery, in which the bourgeoisie had replaced landowners, Narodnism aimed to become a political force opposed to the phenomenon. Narodniks viewed aspects of the past with nostalgia: although they resented the former land ownership system, they opposed the uprooting of peasants from the traditional obshchina system of communes. Narodniks focused upon the growing conflict between the so-called kulaks; the groups which formed shared the common general aims of destroying the Russian monarchy and the kulaks, of distributing land among the peasantry. The Narodniks believed that it was possible to forgo the capitalist phase of Russia's development and proceed directly to socialism.
The Narodniks saw the peasantry as the revolutionary class that would overthrow the monarchy, perceived the village commune as the embryo of socialism. However, they believed that the peasantry would not achieve revolution on their own, insisting instead that history could only be made by outstanding personalities, who would lead an otherwise passive peasantry to revolution. Vasily Vorontsov called for the Russian intelligentsia to "bestir itself from the mental lethargy into which, in contrast to the sensitive and lively years of the seventies, it had fallen and formulate a scientific theory of Russian economic development". However, some Narodnik intellectuals called for an immediate revolution that went beyond philosophical and political discussion. In the spring of 1874, the Narodnik intelligentsia left the cities for the villages, "going to the people" in an attempt to teach the peasantry their moral imperative to revolt, they found no support. Given the Narodniks' middle- and upper-middle-class social background, they found difficulty relating to the impoverished peasants and their culture.
They spent much such as clothing and dancing. Narodniks were viewed with suspicion by many Russian peasants, who were removed from the more modernized culture of the urban sphere; the authorities responded to the Narodniks' attempt with repression: revolutionaries and their peasant sympathizers were imprisoned and exiled. One response to this repression was the formation of Russia's first organized revolutionary party, Narodnaya Volya, in June 1879, it favoured secret society-led terrorism, justified “as a means of exerting pressure on the government for reform, as the spark that would ignite a vast peasant uprising, as the inevitable response to the regime's use of violence against the revolutionaries”. The attempt to get the peasantry to overthrow the Tsar proved unsuccessful, due to the peasantry's idolisation of the latter as someone "on their side". Narodism therefore developed the practice of terrorism: the peasantry, they believed, had to be shown that the Tsar was not supernatural, could be killed.
This theory, called "direct struggle", intended "uninterrupted demonstration of the possibility of struggling against the government, in this manner lifting the revolutionary spirit of the people and its faith in the success of the cause, organising those capable of fighting". On March 1, 1881, they succeeded in assassinating Alexander II; this act backfired on a political level, because the peasantry were horrified by the murder, the government had many Narodnaya Volya leaders hanged, leaving the group unorganized and ineffective. However, these events did not mark the end of the movement, the Socialist-Revolutionaries, Popular Socialists, Trudoviks all pursued similar ideas and tactics to the Narodniks; the philosophy and actions of the Narodniks therefore helped prepare the way for the Russian revolutions of 1905 and 1917. The Narodnik movement was a populist initiative to engage the rural classes of Russia in a political debate that would overthrow the Tsar’s government in the nineteenth century.
Unlike the French Revolution or the European Revolutions of 1848, the “to the people” movement was political activism from wealthier individuals. These individuals were anti-