Human rights movement in the Soviet Union
In the 1960s a human rights movement began to emerge in the USSR. Those involved did not share a single set of beliefs. Many wanted a variety of civil rights — freedom of expression, of religious belief, of national self-determination. To some it was crucial to provide a truthful record of what was happening in the country, not the censored version provided in official media outlets. Others still were "reform Communists" who thought it possible to change the Soviet system for the better. Under the pressure of official actions and responses these groups and interests coalesced in the dissident milieu; the fight for civil and human rights focused on issues of freedom of expression, freedom of conscience, freedom to emigrate, punitive psychiatry, the plight of political prisoners. It was characterized by a new openness of dissent, a concern for legality, the rejection of any'underground' and violent struggle. Like other dissidents in the post-Stalin Soviet Union, human rights activists were subjected to a broad range of repressive measures.
They received warnings from the police and the KGB. The documentation of political repressions as well as citizens' reactions to them through samizdat methods played a key role in the formation of the human rights movement. Dissidents collected and distributed transcripts, open letters and appeals relating to specific cases of political repressions; the prototype for this type of writing was journalist Frida Vigdorova's record of the trial of poet Joseph Brodsky. Similar documenting activity was taken up by dissidents in publications such as Alexander Ginzburg's White Book and Pavel Litvinov's The Trial of the Four. From 1968 on, the samizdat periodical A Chronicle of Current Events played a key role for the human rights movement. Founded in April 1968, the Chronicle ran until 1983, it documented the extensive human rights violations committed by the Soviet government and the ever-expanding samizdat publications circulating among the critical and opposition-minded. Podpisanty signatories, were individuals who signed a series of petitions to officials and the Soviet press against political trials of the mid- to late-1960s.
The podpisanty surge reached its high water mark during the trial of writers Aleksandr Ginzburg and Yuri Galanskov in January 1968. The authorities responded to this challenge by offering each podpisant a choice between recantation and some kind of professional punishment. By 1968 more than 1500 people had signed appeals protesting various cases; the first Soviet dissidents to appeal to the world public were Larisa Bogoraz and Pavel Litvinov, who wrote an open letter protesting the trial of samizdat authors Alexander Ginsburg and Yuri Galanskov in January 1968. Appeals to the international community and human rights bodies became a central method of early civic dissident groups such as the Action Group and the Committee on Human Rights, as well as the Helsinki Watch Groups. Limited in scope and number, several demonstrations became significant landmarks of the human rights movement. On 5 December 1965 a small rally in Moscow, which became known as the, the first public and overtly political demonstration took place in the post-Stalin USSR.
Responding to the criminal charges against the writers Andrei Sinyavsky and Yuli Daniel, a few dozen people gathered on Pushkin Square, calling for a trial open to the public and the media, as required by the 1961 RSFSR Code of Criminal Procedure. The demonstration was one of the first organized actions by the civil right movement in the Soviet Union. Silent gatherings on that date became an annual event. A similar demonstration followed in January 1967, when a group of young demonstrators protested against the recent arrests of samizdat authors, against the introduction of new articles to the Criminal Code that restricted the right to protest. Responding to the Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia, on 25 August 1968 seven dissidents demonstrated on Red Square; the participants were subsequently sentenced to terms of imprisonment in labor camps, banishment to Siberia or incarceration in psychiatric prison-hospitals. On 30 October 1974, dissidents initiated a Day of the Political Prisoner in the USSR, intended to raise awareness of the existence and conditions of political prisoners throughout the Soviet Union.
It was marked by hunger strikes in prisons and labor camps, became an annual event marked by political prisoners in labor camps. Starting with the Action Group formed in 1969 by 15 dissidents and the Committee on Human Rights in the USSR founded in 1970 by Andrei Sakharov, early Soviet human rights groups legitimized their work by referring to the principles enshrined in the Soviet constitution and to international agreements; these attempts were succeeded by the more successful Moscow Helsinki Group. The group as well as the watch groups modeled after it brought the human rights dissidents to increased international attention; the dissident civil and human rights groups were faced with harsh repressions, with most members facing imprisonment, punitive psychiatry, or exile. Families of arrested dissidents suffered repercussions such as the loss of jobs and opportunities to study. Relatives and friends of political prisoners supported each other through informal networks of
Prisoner of war
A prisoner of war is a person, whether a combatant or a non-combatant, held in custody by a belligerent power during or after an armed conflict. The earliest recorded usage of the phrase "prisoner of war" dates back to 1660. Belligerents hold prisoners of war in custody for a range of legitimate and illegitimate reasons, such as isolating them from enemy combatants still in the field, demonstrating military victory, punishing them, prosecuting them for war crimes, exploiting them for their labour, recruiting or conscripting them as their own combatants, collecting military and political intelligence from them, or indoctrinating them in new political or religious beliefs. For most of human history, depending on the culture of the victors, enemy combatants on the losing side in a battle who had surrendered and been taken as a prisoner of war could expect to be either slaughtered or enslaved; the first Roman gladiators were prisoners of war and were named according to their ethnic roots such as Samnite and the Gaul.
Homer's Iliad describes Greek and Trojan soldiers offering rewards of wealth to opposing forces who have defeated them on the battlefield in exchange for mercy, but their offers are not always accepted. Little distinction was made between enemy combatants and enemy civilians, although women and children were more to be spared. Sometimes, the purpose of a battle, if not a war, was to capture a practice known as raptio. Women had no rights, were held as chattel. In the fourth century AD, Bishop Acacius of Amida, touched by the plight of Persian prisoners captured in a recent war with the Roman Empire, who were held in his town under appalling conditions and destined for a life of slavery, took the initiative of ransoming them, by selling his church's precious gold and silver vessels, letting them return to their country. For this he was canonized. During Childeric's siege and blockade of Paris in 464, the nun Geneviève pleaded with the Frankish king for the welfare of prisoners of war and met with a favourable response.
Clovis I liberated captives after Genevieve urged him to do so. Many French prisoners of war were killed during the Battle of Agincourt in 1415; this was done in retaliation for the French killing of the boys and other non-combatants handling the baggage and equipment of the army, because the French were attacking again and Henry was afraid that they would break through and free the prisoners to fight again. In the Middle Ages, a number of religious wars aimed to not only defeat but eliminate their enemies. In Christian Europe, the extermination of heretics was considered desirable. Examples include the Northern Crusades; when asked by a Crusader how to distinguish between the Catholics and Cathars once they'd taken the city of Béziers, the Papal Legate Arnaud Amalric famously replied, "Kill them all, God will know His own". The inhabitants of conquered cities were massacred during the Crusades against the Muslims in the 11th and 12th centuries. Noblemen could hope to be ransomed. In feudal Japan, there was no custom of ransoming prisoners of war, who were for the most part summarily executed.
The expanding Mongol Empire was famous for distinguishing between cities or towns that surrendered, where the population were spared but required to support the conquering Mongol army, those that resisted, where their city was ransacked and destroyed, all the population killed. In Termez, on the Oxus: "all the people, both men and women, were driven out onto the plain, divided in accordance with their usual custom they were all slain"; the Aztecs were at war with neighbouring tribes and groups, with the goal of this constant warfare being to collect live prisoners for sacrifice. For the re-consecration of Great Pyramid of Tenochtitlan in 1487, "between 10,000 and 80,400 persons" were sacrificed. During the early Muslim conquests, Muslims captured large number of prisoners. Aside from those who converted, most were enslaved. Christians who were captured during the Crusades, were either killed or sold into slavery if they could not pay a ransom. During his lifetime, Muhammad made it the responsibility of the Islamic government to provide food and clothing, on a reasonable basis, to captives, regardless of their religion.
The freeing of prisoners was recommended as a charitable act. On certain occasions where Muhammad felt the enemy had broken a treaty with the Muslims, he ordered the mass execution of male prisoners, such as the Banu Qurayza. Females and children of this tribe were divided up as spoils of war by Muhammad; the 1648 Peace of Westphalia, which ended the Thirty Years' War, established the rule that prisoners of war should be released without ransom at the end of hostilities and that they should be allowed to return to their homelands. There evolved the right of parole, French for "discourse", in which a captured officer surrendered his sword and gave his word as a gentleman in exchange for privileges. If he swore not to escape, he could gain the freedom of the prison. If he swore to cease hostilities against the nation who held him captive, he could be repatriated or exchanged but could not serve against his former captors in a military capacity. Ea
Working Commission to Investigate the Use of Psychiatry for Political Purposes
The Working Commission to Investigate the Use of Psychiatry for Political Purposes was an offshoot of the Moscow Helsinki Group and a key source of information on psychiatric repression in the Soviet Union. The commission was established on 5 January 1977 on the initiative of Alexandr Podrabinek along with a 47-year-old self-educated worker Feliks Serebrov, a 30-year-old computer programmer Vyacheslav Bakhmin and Irina Kuplun and was composed of five open members and several anonymous ones, including a few psychiatrists who, at great danger to themselves, conducted their own independent examinations of cases of alleged psychiatric abuse; the leader of the commission was Alexandr Podrabinek who published a book Punitive Medicine containing a ‘white list’ of two hundred of prisoners of conscience in Soviet mental hospitals and a ‘black list’ of over one hundred medical staff and doctors who took part in committing people to psychiatric facilities for political reasons. The psychiatric consultants to the Commission were Dr Alexander Voloshanovich and Dr Anatoly Koryagin.
The task stated by the Commission was not to diagnose persons or to declare people who sought help mentally ill or mentally healthy. However, in some instances individuals who came for help to the Commission were examined by a psychiatrist who provided help to the Commission and made a precise diagnosis of their mental condition. At first it was psychiatrist Aleksandr Voloshanovich from the Moscow suburb of Dolgoprudny, who made these diagnoses, but when he had been compelled to emigrate on 7 February 1980, his work was continued by the Kharkov psychiatrist Anatoly Koryagin. Koryagin's contribution was to examine former and potential victims of political abuse of psychiatry by writing psychiatric diagnoses in which he deduced that the individual was not suffering from any mental disease; those reports were employed as a means of defense: if the individual was picked up again and committed to mental hospital, the Commission had vindication that the hospitalization served non-medical purposes.
Some foreign psychiatrists including the Swedish psychiatrist Harald Blomberg and British psychiatrist Gery Low-Beer helped in examining former or potential victims of psychiatric abuse. The Commission publicly referred to them when it was essential; the commission gathered as much information as possible of victims of psychiatric terror in the Soviet Union and published this information in their Information Bulletins. For the four years of its existence, the Commission published more than 1,500 pages of documentation including 22 Information Bulletins in which over 400 cases of the political abuse of psychiatry were documented in great detail. Summaries of the Information Bulletins were published in the key samizdat publication, A Chronicle of Current Events; the Information Bulletins were sent to the Soviet officials, with request to verify the data and notify the Commission if mistakes were found, to the West, where human rights defenders used them in the course of their campaigns. The Information Bulletins were used to provide the dissident movement with information about Western protests against the political abuse.
The Working Commission gathered information about relevant international events and published reports on the Honolulu Congress of the World Psychiatric Association, including the texts of the key resolutions, printed translations of long letters by Professor Peter Berner about the course of establishing the Review Committee on abuse. Over fifty victims examined by psychiatrists of the Moscow Working Commission between 1977 and 1981 and the files smuggled to the West by Vladimir Bukovsky in 1971 were the material which convinced most psychiatric associations that there was distinctly something wrong in the USSR. Peter Reddaway said that after he had studied official documents in the Soviet archives, including minutes from meetings of the Politburo of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, it became evident to him that Soviet officials at high levels paid close attention to foreign responses to these cases, if someone was discharged, all dissidents felt the pressure had played a significant part and the more foreign pressure the better.
In the autumn of 1978, the British Royal College of Psychiatrists carried a resolution in which it reiterated its concern over the abuse of psychiatry for the suppression of dissent in the USSR and applauded the Soviet citizens, who had taken an open stance against such abuse, by expressing its admiration and support for Semyon Gluzman, Alexander Podrabinek, Alexander Voloshanovich, Vladimir Moskalkov. Members of the Working Commission have been stifled through impisonment. All of its members were forced to emigrate; the Working Commission ceased to exist on 21 July 1981 when its last member Feliks Serebrov was sentenced to 5 years of camps and 5 years of exile. Prior to that, members of the Working Commission were arrested and sentenced to various terms of imprisonment and exile: Alexander Podrabinek was sentenced to 3 years of imprisonment, Vyacheslav Bakhmin was sentenced to 3 years of imprisonment, Leonard Ternovsky was sentenced to 3 years of imprisonment, Irina Grivnina was sentenced to 5 years of exile, Anatoly Koryagin was sentenced to severe punishment under Part 1 of Article of 70 the RSFSR Criminal Code, 7 years in prison camps and 5 years of subsequent exile.
The charge was anti-Soviet activities for having corresponded with the British medical journal The Lancet, which published an article by Koryagin critical of the Soviet government's use of involuntary psychiatric confinement for political reasons
Activism consists of efforts to promote, direct, or intervene in social, economic, or environmental reform with the desire to make changes in society. Forms of activism range from mandate building in the community, petitioning elected officials, running or contributing to a political campaign, preferential patronage of businesses, demonstrative forms of activism like rallies, street marches, sit-ins, or hunger strikes. Activism may be performed on a day-to-day basis in a wide variety of ways, including through the creation of art, computer hacking, or in how one chooses to spend their money. For example, the refusal to buy clothes or other merchandise from a company as a protest against the exploitation of workers by that company could be considered an expression of activism. However, the most visible and impactful activism comes in the form of collective action, in which numerous individuals coordinate an act of protest together in order to make a bigger impact. Collective action, purposeful and sustained over a period of time becomes known as a social movement.
Activists have used literature, including pamphlets and books to disseminate their messages and attempt to persuade their readers of the justice of their cause. Research has now begun to explore how contemporary activist groups use social media to facilitate civic engagement and collective action combining politics with technology; the Online Etymology Dictionary records the English words "activism" and "activist" as in use in the political sense from the year 1920 or 1915 respectively. The history of the word activism traces back to earlier understandings of collective behavior and social action; as late as 1969 activism was defined as "the policy or practice of doing things with decision and energy", without regard to a political signification, whereas social action was defined as "organized action taken by a group to improve social conditions", without regard to normative status. Following the surge of so-called "new social movements" in the United States in the 1960's, a new understanding of activism emerged as a rational and acceptable democratic option of protest or appeal.
However, the history of the existence of revolt through organized or unified protest in recorded history dates back to the slave revolts of the 1st century BC in the Roman Empire, where under the leadership of former gladiator Spartacus 6,000 slaves rebelled and were crucified from Capua to Rome in what became known as the Third Servile War. In English history, the Peasant's Revolt erupted in response to the imposition of a poll tax, has been paralleled by other rebellions and revolutions in Hungary and more for example, Hong Kong. In 1930 under the leadership of Mahatma Gandhi thousands of protesting Indians participated in the Salt March as a protest against the oppressive taxes of their government, resulting in the imprisonment of 60,000 people and eventual independence for their nation. In nations throughout Asia and South America, the prominence of activism organized by social movements and under the leadership of civil activists or social revolutionaries has pushed for increasing national self-reliance or, in some parts of the developing world, collectivist communist or socialist organization and affiliation.
Activism has had major impacts on Western societies as well over the past century through social movements such as the Labour movement, the Women's Rights movement, the civil rights movement. Activists can function in a number of roles, including judicial, environmental and design. Most activism has focused on creating substantive changes in the policy or practice of a government or industry; some activists try to persuade people to change their behavior directly, rather than to persuade governments to change laws. For example, the cooperative movement seeks to build new institutions which conform to cooperative principles, does not lobby or protest politically. Other activists try to persuade people or government policy to remain the same, in an effort to counter change. Activism is not always an activity performed by those; the term activist may apply broadly to anyone who engages in activism, or be more narrowly limited to those who choose political or social activism as a vocation or characteristic practice.
Judicial activism involves the efforts of public officials. Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. - American historian, public intellectual, social critic - introduced the term "judicial activism" in a January 1946 Fortune magazine article titled "The Supreme Court: 1947". Activists can be public watchdogs and whistle blowers, attempting to understand all the actions of every form of government that acts in the name of the people and hold it accountable to oversight and transparency. Activism involves an engaged citizenry. Environmental activism takes quite a few forms: the protection of nature or the natural environment driven by a utilitarian conservation ethic or a nature oriented preservationist ethic the protection of the human environment (by pollution prevention or the protection of cultural heritage or quality of life the conservation of depletable natural resources the protection of the function of critical earth system elements or processes such as the climate; the power of Internet activism came into a global lens with the Arab Spring protests starting in late 2010.
People living in the Middle East and North African countries that were experiencing revolutions used social networking to communicate information about protests, including videos recorded on smart phones
Soviet dissidents were people who disagreed with certain features in the embodiment of Soviet ideology and who were willing to speak out against them. The term dissident was used in the Soviet Union in the period following Joseph Stalin's death until the fall of communism, it was used to refer to small groups of marginalized intellectuals whose modest challenges to the Soviet regime met protection and encouragement from correspondents. Following the etymology of the term, a dissident is considered to "sit apart" from the regime; as dissenters began self-identifying as dissidents, the term came to refer to an individual whose non-conformism was perceived to be for the good of a society. Political opposition in the USSR was visible and, with rare exceptions, of little consequence. Instead, an important element of dissident activity in the Soviet Union was informing society about violation of laws and human rights. Over time, the dissident movement created vivid awareness of Soviet Communist abuses.
Soviet dissidents who criticized the state faced possible legal sanctions under the Soviet Criminal Code and faced the choice of exile, the mental hospital, or the labor camp. Anti-Soviet political behavior, in particular, being outspoken in opposition to the authorities, demonstrating for reform, writing books were defined in some persons as being a criminal act, a symptom, a diagnosis. In the 1950s, Soviet dissidents started leaking criticism to the West by sending documents and statements to foreign diplomatic missions in Moscow. In the 1960s, Soviet dissidents declared that the rights the government of the Soviet Union denied them were universal rights, possessed by everyone regardless of race and nationality. In August 1969, for instance, the Initiating Group for Defense of Civil Rights in the USSR appealed to the United Nations Committee on Human Rights to defend the human rights being trampled on by Soviet authorities in a number of trials. Our history shows that most of the people can be fooled for a long time.
But now all this idiocy is coming into clear contradiction with the fact that we have some level of openness. The heyday of the dissenters as a presence in the Western public life was the 1970s; the Helsinki Accords inspired dissidents in the Soviet Union, Czechoslovakia and Poland to protest human rights failures by their own governments. The Soviet dissidents demanded that the Soviet authorities implement their own commitments proceeding from the Helsinki Agreement with the same zeal and in the same way as the outspoken legalists expected the Soviet authorities to adhere to the letter of their constitution. Dissident Russian and East European intellectuals who urged compliance with the Helsinki accords have been subjected to official repression. According to Soviet dissident Leonid Plyushch, Moscow has taken advantage of the Helsinki security pact to improve its economy while increasing the suppression of political dissenters. 50 members of Soviet Helsinki Groups were imprisoned. Cases of political prisoners and prisoners of conscience in the Soviet Union were divulged by Amnesty International in 1975 and by The Committee for the Defense of Soviet Political Prisoners in 1975 and 1976.
US President Jimmy Carter in his inaugural address on 20 January 1977 announced that human rights would be central to foreign policy during his administration. In February, Carter sent Andrei Dmitrievich Sakharov a letter expressing his support for the latter's stance on human rights. In the wake of Carter's letter to Sakharov, the USSR cautioned against attempts "to interfere' in its affairs under "a thought-up pretext of'defending human rights.'" Because of Carter's open show of support for Soviet dissidents, the KGB was able to link dissent with American imperialism through suggesting that such protest is a cover for American espionage in the Soviet Union. The KGB head Yuri Andropov determined, "The need has thus emerged to terminate the actions of Orlov, fellow Helsinki monitor Ginzburg and others once and for all, on the basis of existing law." According to Dmitri Volkogonov and Harold Shukman, it was Andropov who approved the numerous trials of human rights activists such as Andrei Amalrik, Vladimir Bukovsky, Vyacheslav Chornovil, Zviad Gamsakhurdia, Alexander Ginzburg, Natalya Gorbanevskaya, Pyotr Grigorenko, Anatoly Shcharansky, others.
According to Soviet dissident Yuri Glazov, Andropov was a paradigmatic Homo Sovieticus and conducted disinformation campaigns against his main opponents and dissidents Andrei Sakharov and Alexander Solzhenitsyn. If we accept human rights violations as just "their way" of doing things we are all guilty. Voluntary and involuntary emigration allowed the authorities to rid themselves of many political active intellectuals including writers Valentin Turchin, Georgi Vladimov, Vladimir Voinovich, Lev Kopelev, Vladimir Maximov, Naum Korzhavin, Vasily Aksyonov and others. A Chronicle of Current Events covered 424 political trials, in which 753 people were convicted, no one of the accused was acquitted. According to Soviet dissidents and Western critics, the KGB had sent dissenters to psychiatrists for diagnosing to avoid embarrassing publiс trials and to discredit dissidence as the product of ill minds. On the grounds that political dissenters in the Soviet Union were psychotic and deluded, they were locked away in psychiatric hospitals and treated with neuroleptics.
Confinement of political dissenters in psychiatric institutions had become a comm
Nikolai Alexandrovich Berdyaev was a Russian political and Christian religious philosopher who emphasized the existential spiritual significance of human freedom and the human person. Alternate historical spellings of his name in English include "Berdiaev" and "Berdiaeff", of his given name as "Nicolas" and "Nicholas". Nikolai Berdyaev was born at Kiev Governorate in 1874, in an aristocratic military family, his father, Alexander Mikhailovich Berdyaev, came from a long line of Kharkiv nobility. All of Alexander Mikhailovich's ancestors served as high-ranking military officers, but he resigned from the army quite early and became active in the social life of the Kiev aristocracy. Nikolai's mother, Alina Sergeevna Berdyaeva, was half-French and came from the top levels of both French and Russian nobility, he had Polish and Tatar origins. Influenced by Voltaire, his father was an educated man that considered himself a freethinker and expressed great skepticism towards religion. Nikolai's mother, Eastern Orthodox by birth, was in her views on religion more Catholic than Orthodox.
He spent a solitary childhood at home. He read Hegel and Kant when he was only 14 and excelled at languages. Berdyaev decided on an intellectual career and entered the Kiev University in 1894, it was a time of revolutionary fervor among the intelligentsia. He became a Marxist and he was arrested in a student demonstration and expelled from the university, his involvement in illegal activities led in 1897 to three years of internal exile to Vologda, in northern Russia, a milder sentence compared than that faced by many other revolutionaries. In 1904, he married Lydia Yudifovna Trusheff; the couple moved to Saint Petersburg, the Russian capital, the centre of intellectual and revolutionary activity. He participated in intellectual and spiritual debate departing from radical Marxism to focus his attention on philosophy and Christian spirituality. A fiery 1913 article, entitled "Quenchers of the Spirit", criticising the rough purging of Imiaslavie Russian monks on Mount Athos by the Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church using tsarist troops, caused him to be charged with the crime of blasphemy, the punishment for, exile to Siberia for life.
The World War and the Bolshevik Revolution prevented the matter coming to trial. After the October Revolution of 1917, as the Bolshevik régime began consolidating its power with a growing suppression of non-Lenin Marxist Intelligentsia, Berdyaev remained steadfast in his criticism of its totalitarianism and the domination of the state over the freedom of the individual. Nonetheless, he was permitted, for the time being, to continue to write, his disaffection culminated, in 1919, with the foundation of his own private academy, the "Free Academy of Spiritual Culture". It was a forum for him to lecture on the hot topics of the day and to present them from a Christian point of view, he presented his opinions in public lectures, every Tuesday, the academy hosted a meeting at his home because official Soviet anti-religious activity was intense at the time and the official policy of the Bolshevik government, with its Soviet anti-religious legislation promoted State atheism. In 1920, Berdiaev became professor of philosophy at the University of Moscow.
In the same year, he was accused of participating in a conspiracy against the government. The feared head of the Cheka, Felix Dzerzhinsky, came in person to interrogate him, he gave his interrogator a solid dressingdown on the problems with Bolshevism. Novelist Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn in his book The Gulag Archipelago recounts the incident as follows: was arrested twice, but Berdyaev did not humiliate himself, he did not beg, he professed the moral and religious principles by virtue of which he did not adhere to the party in power. Now there is a man who had a "point of view"! The Soviet authorities expelled Berdyaev from Russia, in September 1922, he became one of a group of prominent writers and intellectuals who were sent into forced exile on the so-called "philosophers' ships". At first and other émigrés went to Berlin, where he founded an academy of philosophy and religion, but economic and political conditions in the Weimar Republic caused him and his wife to move to Paris in 1923, he transferred his academy there, taught and wrote, working for an exchange of ideas with the French and European intellectual community, participated in a number of international conferences.
During the German occupation of France during World War II, Berdyaev continued to write books that were published after the war, some of them after his death. In the years that he spent in France, Berdyaev wrote 15 books, including most of his most important works, he died at his writing desk in his home in Clamart, near Paris, in 1948. Primary source biographical works in English are Berdyaev's intellectual autobiography, published under the title Dream and Reality, Donald A. Lowrie's 1960 book, Rebellious Prophet: A Life of Nikolai Berdyaev, written in close collaboration with Berdyaev's sister-in-law, Evgenia Rapp, others of their close acquaintance under the auspices of the Berdiaev Société. David Bonner Richardson described Berdyaev's philosophy as Christian personalism, he emphasized the importance of creativity. According
The intelligentsia is a status class of educated people engaged in the complex mental labours that critique and lead in shaping the culture and politics of their society. As a status class, the intelligentsia includes artists and academics, writers and the literary hommes de lettres; the intelligentsia status-class arose in the late 18th century, in Russian-controlled Poland, during the age of Partitions. In the 19th century, the Polish intellectual Bronisław Trentowski coined the term intelligentcja to identify and describe the educated and professionally-active social stratum of the patriotic bourgeoisie who could be the cultural leaders of Poland under the authoritarian régime of Russian Tsarist autocracy, from the late 18th-century to the early 20th century. In Russia, before the Bolshevik Revolution the term intelligentsiya described the status class of educated people whose cultural capital allowed them to assume practical political leadership. In practice, the status and social function of the intelligentsia varied by society.
In Eastern Europe, intellectuals were deprived of political influence and access to the effective levers of economic development. Whereas in Western Europe in Germany and Great Britain, the Bildungsbürgertum and the British professions had defined roles as public intellectuals in their societies. In Europe, the intelligentsia existed as a status class before the coinage of the term intelligentsia in the 19th century. In their status-class functions, the intellectuals had involvement with the cultural development of cities, the dissemination of printed knowledge, the economic development of rental-housing for the teacher, the journalist, the civil servant; as people whose professions placed them outside the traditional places and functions of the town-and-country monarchic social-classes of the time, the intelligentsia were an urban social-class. In his 2008 work The Rise of the Intelligentsia, 1750–1831, Maciej Janowski identified the intelligentsia as intellectual servants to the modern State, to the degree that their state-service policies decreased social backwardness and political repression in partitioned Poland.
The Polish philosopher Karol Libelt coined the term inteligencja in his publication of O miłości ojczyzny in 1844. In the Polish language, the popular understanding of the word inteligencja is close Libelt's definition, which saw the inteligencja status-class as the well-educated people of society, who undertake to provide moral leadership, as scholars, lawyers, engineers et al.. The Russian word intelligentsiya derived from the German word Intelligenz and identified and described the social stratum of people engaged in intellectual occupations. Vitaly Tepikin identified the characteristics of the group copmprising the intelligentsia as follows:1) the advanced for its time moral ideals, sensitivity to the neighbor and gentleness in manifestations. In 1844 Poland, the term intelligencja, identifying the intellectuals of society, first was used by the philosopher Karol Libelt, which he described as a status class of people characterised by intellect and Polish nationalism; that the intelligentsia were aware of their social status and of their duties to society: Educating the youth with the nationalist objective to restore the Republic of Poland.
Nonetheless, the writers Stanisław Brzozowski and Tadeusz Boy-Żeleński criticised Libelt's ideological and messianic representation of a Polish republic, because it originated from the social traditionalism and reactionary conservatism that pervade the culture of Poland, so impede socio-economic progress. C