Banned
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 4,130
|
Golden Dawn on Atheism
This is the Party's take on Atheism in the Soviet Revolution.
Quote:
The Movement of atheists or "Union of atheists"
Sunday, August 5, 2012 - 8:35
I stand over all the roads and bowing deeply, I ask forgiveness from everyone .... and man and beast, and the dust-forgive me! As the sun calls on the grass, she whispered in my heart bro! And bless me in my new course!
Ivan Brichnitsef "Towards a new course" - 1916
The "Union of atheists" or "Company of atheists" (also known by other names - "'Union warring atheist," "militant atheists Union") was a massive anti-religious voluntary organization of Soviet workers, but also other groups of the Soviet population the years 1925-1947. The Union was formed in April 1925 by the transformation and expansion of the "Union of Friends of the newspaper" Atheist "(" Besmpoznik ")" was founded in 1924 and in accordance with the Statute of "Formed by members of the party, members of the" Communist Union Youth "(" Komsomol "), workers and veterans of the army."
The Union was the body of a mass anti-religious movement that developed in Soviet Russia in the implementation of the policies of the Communist Party, under the influence of ideological and cultural points of views. Approached by the action of the workers, peasants, students and the intelligentsia. In the early period of the action of the Union set up its first subsidiary organizations in factories, on plantations, in the collective farms (kolkhoz), and in all educational institutions. In early 1941, the Union had about 3.5 million members, 100 different nationalities. Maintained around 96,000 offices throughout the Soviet Union. Led by the Bolshevik authorities anti-religious propaganda, the following related party guiding religion commands.
The Union sought to methodical fighting religion in all its manifestations and systematic "shape scientific culture among the workers" to "fasten firmly atheism with reasonably materialistic arguments." Establishing worked as a weighted measure of the Soviet anti-religious efforts, but despite extensive support from the regime, the influence of the organization remained relatively weak. The activities under the guidance of the leader and driving force of Emelian Giaroslavski focused primarily on the creation and consolidation of a publishing empire with diverse cultural and propaganda activities, thereby contributing to collective multivolume including extensive theoretical work on sequels, numerous monographs, pamphlets and methodological guides. Extensive published scientific literature and journals, constituted and organized museum exhibitions organized, while at the same time directed the scientific research of atheism and criticism of religion. Moreover, the organization hosted numerous propaganda campaigns carried out against the observance of religious ceremonies and festivals. These campaigns sought to introduce the newly established Soviet society the new calendar and rituals, with kaloekpaidefmena activists who were making pursued lectures on anti-religious themes.
The Union secularize atheism and new scientific breakthroughs, by conducting a systematic "individual work" (a method of proselytizing by atheists who met Enlightenment individual challengers to convince them of atheism on and if the receivers failed to "comply" then could be followed by public outcry and directed the harassment).
Obviously, the organization also acted on a massive scale to collectively addressed by conducting a host of well-designed campaigns led cooperating "apostates" theologians and clergy, properly prepared propagandists and atheists intellectuals. The main slogan of the Union was "The struggle against religion is an attempt to socialism" and sought to link the atheistic views on the economy, politics and culture. One of the slogans adopted early in the second conference was "The struggle against religion is an attempt on the five-year plan!". The Union had unlimited international connections: he was a member of the "International Eleftherostochaston the proletariat" and later "World Union Eleftherostochaston."
Despite efforts unstintingly supported, before 1929 the Union appears ineffectual in its efforts to overcome religion. In 1929 registered members rose very quickly to 1 million. Certainly this impressive quadrupling the size of the potential of the Union in 1928 and beyond. not necessarily prove the sudden annihilation of religion: In coordination conference of the organization in early 1929, many regional representatives reported a "typical single cells and councils organized atheists to 1928," as Antelmpergk from Siberia, the Urals from Sepkin and Ampramson the spokesman of the Kyrgyz Republic. Thus the overall impact of the efforts of the association is difficult to assess accurately, but we can certainly come to the conclusion that, in 1929 the Union had achieved a truly comprehensive transformation of religious life, which was still popular amongst the working classes.
In early 1930, the Union claimed to have over five million members. The ironic and contradictory, or if it appears first, the former Orthodox clergy was employed as an official of the Union at various organizational levels. Indeed, such individuals played key roles in the initial establishment and staffing of the Union and headquarters, and was evident as chamilovathma activists across the state network. The particular history of so-called "bourgeois specialists" the first Soviet period provides a useful framework for understanding the surface contradictory phenomenon of "atheists - former clergy." Although the first months of the Bolshevik government in Soviet Russia was managing the factory workers formed a secular society and military efforts were shaping and promoting a "proletarian culture", after a few years (in the case of the "Red Army" much sooner) the status returned to more traditional practices: the "control of the workers' factories collapsed, while radically different cultural experiments of the communist leadership faded and vanished.
The Bolshevik leadership quickly realized that the difficult management of Soviet Russia called for the efficient service of "bourgeois specialists", that had a direct and undeniable need of those qualified persons who possessed an extensive variety of technical and managerial positions during the pre-revolutionary period. The uptake of pre-Revolutionary clergy also had great significance for the Bolsheviks, because what the staff of "rotten past" was to work in an ideologically sensitive field. While the leadership of the Bolsheviks never claimed that he possesses the necessary military experience, advanced scientific training or experience in industrial management, members of a revolutionary party, of course, expected to be highly trained and competent in matters of ideology.
Despite the transient contact and flirt with some Russian Marxists some form of Christian socialism in the early 20th century, Bolshevism (as was generally perceived by their leaders in 1917), clearly intended and unswerving dedication to the final destruction of religion in Russia. That were accepted into the innermost sanctuary of ideological communist state some experts in specialist fields and backgrounds, "permanent and incurable infectious' according to the Bolshevik ideology, is the most obvious and impressive proof of the necessity of withdrawal led to tolerance and acceptance of such persons.
The Bolsheviks had little activists sufficiently experienced in theological and religious issues in order to be effective in combating the desired radical religion. Consequently, the alleged leader of the campaign against religion, the Union, he turned for help in pre-revolutionary clergy. Apart from the obvious detailed familiarity with the clergy and the doctrinal orthodoxy of indoctrination, but also because of their capacity verified as preachers and enlighten their use extra features offered directly to Bolshevik propaganda network: structured education in basic religious issues and public skills training Talk to young Soviet catechists.
The party has implemented an extremely suitable for the regular involvement of young people, former "reactionaries" of partners: The Bolshevik propaganda magazines took advantage of these "signings" with the publication of highly standardized, supposedly spontaneous "repentance statements", which the priests apologize to exploit the religious and announced "I went 'intentions to participate in the new" socialist honest work. " The pressure in the clergy rose tremendously after 1928, when the regime intensified its attack on religion.
Adherence to the regime's anti-religious propaganda mechanism require more ex-clergy not merely to renounce their past, but also to participate in a systematic form of work that represented the absolute, continuous, daily denial of their past life and their work. Two overriding priests Michael and Ivan Gkoref Brichnitsef converted to atheism atheists declaring officially, as both had clearly tried searching a previous mental and spiritual development away from the official orthodoxy, and an increasing sympathy for the purpose of revolution.
The religious reform movement that began around the beginning of the 20th century had many facets, ranging from mild internal changes plans to call for a revolutionary Christian socialism. But with one or another form of this movement sought to rescue the Orthodox Church from the stagnation which has had a long affiliation of the state. In the 20s the derivatives of this reform movement was present in the Bolshevik and anti-religious and sectarian mechanism "red church" to innovators. The history of the reform movement, although not adequately explain why some people made the final leap to meet the orthodoxy as "apostates" - Catholic naysayers, but it provides an explanatory framework that excludes defection and the Gkoref Brichnitsef as purely opportunistic or selfish calculation goes with .
The first and most important priest who converted ideologically and mutated into passionate atheist was Michael Gkoref, (born with the surname Gkalkin). The Gkoref was the son of Vladimir Pavlovic Gkalkin, the high priest ("nastogiatel") in the church of St. Matthew in St. Petersburg, a leading activist of moderation, teacher and missionary.
On December 3, 1917, the Pravda published a highly critical commentary Gkoref the then ongoing work of the Ecclesiastical Council and the proposed plan for an extensive separation of church and state. When the "Council of People's Committee" ("Sovnarkom") has created a special five-member committee to determine the separation of church - state, included therein and Gkoref. The official decree of separation was adopted on January 20, 1918 and involved essentially the dismantling of the Russian Orthodox Church as an institution, leaving in place only the anemic "Church Council" with a thoroughly defined, limited legal capacity.
The Gkoref reiterated several times his journalistic activity, which first began with the publication of the newspaper "Banner of Christ" ("Znamia Christ") whose subtitle, "In the golden age of the Apostles," mean in terms of Gkoref for an idealistic and simplistic church, compatible with a revolutionary socialist regime. In articles and letters in early 1918, Gkoref seems to envision an special relationship church - state in which the government would be separate from the limited Orthodox Church as an institution, but will not proceed to any effort to combat the popular religious beliefs and practices.
In June 1918 the Gkoref worked as an expert and associate director of the eighth part of the "People's Justice Committee" ("Narkomioust"), founded by the "Council of People's Committee" in May 1918 (four months after the official separation decree!) to manage kratikoekklisiastikes relations. At the same time, the Gkoref directed the Editorial Committee of large format - the magazine section "Church and Revolution" ("Revoloutsia Tserkov j"), which contributed many articles across the path of (1919-1924).
The Gkoref aposchimatisthike in 1918 and joined the Communist Party in January 1919. From 1918 to 1921, he traveled to the province as a government expert, responsible for various local problems that followed the decree separation of church - state. She also participated in events staged opening of Orthodox shrines of saints, whose bodies were considered by the popular belief indestructible. These public kaloskinothetimenes perform an important part of early anti-religious propaganda of the regime.
In 1922, dramatic changes occurred in both kratikoekklisiastikes relations and in his career Gkoref: At the height of its influence in the party mechanism, Gkoref March was appointed to the committee of the party that was responsible for direct and forcible collection of church valuables, so seemingly be sold abroad to finance the procurement of required food products "to alleviate hunger caused by the blockade of the imperialists." In the same month was published in the Isvestia Gkoref caustic attack on the church leadership for the resistance of the collection of valuables in support of "counter-revolutionary forces."
During the summer, Gkoref bounced back to independent journalism, publishing anti-religious journal "Science and Religion" ("Naouka Relitzia j"). In the 24 issues published between June 26 and 27 November, Gkoref continued the previous attack on the Church of Patriarch Tikhon and religion in general, which was both "necessary to the Communists as the snow of last year." In December, the anti-religious Committee of the Central Committee ended its "Science and Religion" and ordered Gkoref help in the adoption of new anti-religious newspaper "Atheist" ("Bezmpoznik"), launched in late December 1922. The Gkoref along with Emelian Giaroslavski, leader of the future Union, they issued the newspaper until 1926.
In 1924 the Gkoref played a key role in the creation of a voluntary organization of anti-religious propaganda on the national level, the "Society of Friends of the Journal Atheist» - ODGB («Ompsestvo Ntrozei Gazetas Bezmpoznik"), which reconstructed the following year as the "Union of atheists "(" Soyuz Bezmpznikof "). The Gkoref served as deputy chairman of the Union until April 1, 1926, when the Executive Board of the Union removed (for reasons that remain unclear even now), from all positions in the organization. Among the anti-religious forces of the Bolshevik Gkoref was the most senior former priest, but was certainly not the only important.
Another influential activist of the Union, Ivan Brichnitsef had also opposed the established church before the Revolution. As a priest of the temple of the railway station in Tbilisi, the Brichnitsef arrested in 1906 because the newspaper published "Awake asleep!" ("Spiastsii Vstan"), calling on the local guard in an armed rebellion and demonstrated "cheeky disrespect" to the Tsar. The Brichnitsef aposchimatisthike despite the advocacy of the attitude that simply had "current illegalities" in common with fulfilling this way the responsibility of a pastor long term ill people. In subsequent years, the Brichnitsef associated with the radical group "Brotherhood of Christian Race" ("Bratstvo Christianskoe Bormpy"), one of whose leaders, Vladimir Ern, described in a brochure of the Brichnitsef diaprysio as crusader of social justice.
The Brichnitsef also contributed to the magazine "Living Life" ("Zivagia Zizn"), founded in Moscow in 1907 by a great circle of erudite thinkers who comprised the Ern, Floreski Pavel, Sergei Boulgkakof, Dmitry Merezkofski and Zinaida Gkipious.
Between 1906 and 1917 the least Brichnitsef published four volumes of poetry, much of which was embellished with decorative icons. During the First World War, refused to serve in the imperial army and joined the Communist Party in December 1918. During the Russian civil war, he held various party and state positions in Belarus and the Caucasus. Moving to Moscow in early 1920, he worked for several years in Panrosiki Executive Committee of Soviets. In April 1924 the Brichnitsef became "Executive Secretary" in the magazine "Atheist" and like Gkoref, played a major role in establishing the ODGB and then the Union. The Brichnitsef left the leadership of the Union in October 1925 and moved to work in "Company - End Illiteracy!". The actual deposition of Brichnitsef suggests some potential problems with the recruiting of former clergy from the scheme.
The Brichnitsef since late 1924, had begun to complain that the nominally superior Giaroslavski was utterly indifferent to the path of "atheist" and ODGB, and that had allowed the Moscow party organization to discredit the same and the Brichnitsef Gkoref. The complaint against Giaroslavski clearly formatted in a dramatic letter, dated on October 11, 1925, addressed to Gkoref as the author of "atheist" and deputy chairman of the Union. Copies were sent to the Executive Office of the Union, to Stalin, the central control of the Party Committee, the Executive Board of the Union and head of Agkitprop of the Press and the Central Committee. With this letter the Brichnitsef openly expressed bitterness and anger against Giaroslavski while making his political suicide.
Ostensibly, the letter was a complaint about working conditions, but in reality it was a tough anti-Semitic polemic, which argued that the Brichnitsef evicted from the anti-religious work because of the social arrangements and cultural background: "It's hard [for me ] to accept that the Jewish Kostelovskagia Gkoumpelman can be actively anti-religious officials in a country of farmers, while we, Russians who have undergone exile and prison, and decades of wandering as skopefmena people during Tsarism, serving the revolution for twenty years-we can not be anti-religious activists because, for example, twenty years ago I was a priest. "
In a postscript to his letter Brichnitsef explained why he called the Giaroslavski Gkoumpelman throughout the letter, although it understood that this would cause the charge of "ioudaiofovias": ".. but ioudaiofovoi such as myself is that 99 percent of party. It is time to stop scaring us with this goblins. It is time to understand that among the 150 million Russians, one can find solid, powerful, soulful and honest fighters. There is therefore no need for any transactions with Gkoumpelman .... We are available only when a good Russian workers do not always loaded with some Gkoumpelman as commissar. "
At the meeting of the Executive Board of the Union on October 28, 1925, the Brichnitsef deleted permanently from the Union's potential. Then undoubtedly felt that was being persecuted by the Jews, partly because of his past as a priest. By sending the letter of the first Gkoref the Brichnitsef hoped to find at least one person with compassion for him, a potential supporter. He had made a gross error of judgment. As part of the problem already disturbed Russian-Jewish relations in prerevolutionary Russia, the question of how he saw an atheist - "maverick" former priest of Jewish origin fellow propagandists, is a possible subject of further research. Although it is less inaccurate to judge the national identity of the designer in Soviet Russia, the "inner circle" of activists of the Union during the period of exclusion Brichnitsef 1925, does not appear to have many members of Jewish origin.
However, the popular perception among opponents of the regime that Bolshevism was a movement inspired by the Jews and the specific accusation that the regime's campaign against the church headed by the Jews, is even more ironic presence of the former Soviet anti-religious clergy mechanism. The Gkoref Brichnitsef lived and indeed a great spiritual and social way, as a former clergy who came to promote atheism of the Bolsheviks. But in any case, this transformation are not completed at once: long before the revolution and the two have caused them off the religious establishment. And for two, after initial successes as anti-religious activists, their careers ended abruptly in mid-1920. The same goes for another Orthodox priest kosmotheoritikon between two poles (faithful Orthodox priest - antireligious atheist propagandist) ... made an intermediate stop in the church of Ananeoton. Sergei Vasilievich Kalinovski was a priest in Moscow who in 1919 sought to create a "Ergatoagrotiko Christianososialistiko Party." Three years later he was among the troika of priests who forced the Patriarch Tikhon to surrender control of the church to innovators. The Kalinovski published the first issue of the journal Ananeoton "Living Church" "Zivagia Tserkof") but was pushed out the leadership team in August 1922. Several months later, the "atheist" was published the announcement that Kalinovski leave the priesthood. Since then he worked as a freelance lecturer antireligious.
In 1924 the Kalinovski and another former priest sent an letter - proposal to the 13th Party Congress wrote that as a result of the Revolution, many clerics had broken the shackles of their religion and "... had joined the ranks of the workers of enlightenment to reveal ... religion and all the machinations. " The authors note the critical shortage of qualified permanent staff in anti-religious party mechanism and considering that "... no one can be so useful in this work as a priest who was (popular characterization abusive priest) who knows the weaknesses of all religion and is familiar with all the insidious work of the clergy ... we are servants of previous cults, apply to the 13th Party Congress to allow us to organize a special section of the "Central Committee of the Republic for Education Policy" ("Gklavpolitprosvet "). Citing the obvious persistent need for specialists, the authors closed their letter by stating that ".. if the former senior officers of the imperial army could help the Red Army, then they, the former clergy could serve the same purpose in the cultural field. " Although the letter was then minimally acceptable, or at work as anti-religious Kalinofski speaker was a concern for the Union of atheists.
In 1927 an official of the Union attended one of his speeches Kalinovski Ougklits the city and said the speech was scandalous, but Marxist content, full of anecdotes and stories about how he had upset the church Tychonas and referred to the sexual themes in detail both and precise, so that "... the young women left the boardroom." After several unsuccessful attempts to control the Kalinofski, the central board of the Association asked him to call the dreaded OGPU for questioning. The long and colorful history of insubordinate Kalinofski represents yet another variant of the experience of the clergy in the turbulent 20s. By testing various options, the rampant atheist propagandist eventually worked as a self-enlightenment, stubbornly resisting the embrace of available institutional frame work, such as the church of the Union Ananeoton or atheists. His case provides further insights on the social and intellectual apexarthrosis and confusion at the time, but also demonstrates that social categories are established by the Soviet regime often failed to reflect the real conditions of the vast country, even in nominally ideological sphere as well as religion.
While Gkoref, Brichnitsef Kalinofski and represent the most extreme examples of former priests who were anti-religious propagandists, there are several other key officials of the Union, who came also from 'special' cognitive and social backgrounds. Although there were former clergymen, and they emerged from a wider environment cleric, who provided that training and experience which made them particularly useful in anti-religious propaganda effort of the regime.
His father Fedor Nestorovits Olestsouk was a priest and his younger Olestsouk said later that as a young cleric who lived in the environment "had learned to doubt their religion." Having spent four years in a church school and an additional four years in a seminary, The Olestsouk studied in high school and later took the gold medal as an excellent student. Joining the Party in 1921, he worked for several years as a mentor in the antireligious party mechanism of Moscow. In 1925 he was assigned to the main board of the Association as an executive secretary, a position he held until the Second World War.
Another derivative of the cleric was the senior environmental officer of the Union (although not involved with the daily affairs), and prominent veteran Bolshevik, Pyotr Ananevits Krasikof. His grandfather Krasikof the mother was high priest at the Cathedral of Krasnoyarsk and he had spent most of her childhood and adolescence in the house that his grandfather. From 1918 to 1924, he directed Krasikof the eighth part of the Justice Committee, serving as head of Gkoref. Also edited the journal "Revolution and the Church" and there he wrote many of the anti-religious articles. Throughout the course of the Union, the Krasikof was a member of the bureau, and also was a member of the "anti-religious Commission" of the Central Committee and its successor organization, the "Commission for the cults 'of the' EU-wide Central
Executive Committee."
Although numerous sons of clergymen ("popovitsi» i) had participated in the revolutionary movement, strong and a key presence in the Union of atheists highlights a particular relationship between the environment and clerical employment in the mechanism of anti-religious scheme.The Krasikof Gkoref and there were certainly major anti-religious specialists during the Russian Civil War and the years that elapsed before the establishment of the Union and particularly Brichnitsef Gkoref played key roles during the first years of the newspaper "Atheist" and were the leaders of the Union. The Olestsouk was the third officer in command of the Union in the longest period of its existence.
Consequently, much of the leadership of the EU share a common origin, a common social and cultural background provided the skills and knowledge particularly useful for work. The strong emergence of former priests and sons of the propagation of atheism by a revolutionary party (indeed sensitive to the social background of strains) shows not only the initial lack of skilled personnel, and the huge compromises required after setting a goal both extreme as to create an atheist society, ie target requiring sufficient qualified, experienced and competent staff.
These settlements functioned as one of the many sources of disagreement within the regime itself about the identity and functioning of the Union of atheists. From 1923 to 1926, the community of anti-religious propaganda was divided into two "opposing" camps. The one formed around the journal "Atheist", the author Emelian Giaroslafski and organization, the "Union of atheists." The other camp focused on the magazine "Atheist in the workplace" ("My Bezmpoznik Stanka"), issued by the party committee of the Moscow editor of Maria Kostelofskagia and supporters of the Party Committee of the Komsomol in Moscow.
Personal, ideological and institutional elements of the conflict of two rival anti-religious "camps" included the issue of "bourgeois specialists" and the role of former clergy. In Pravda in January 1925 Kostelofskagia criticized the propaganda of the Union, particularly the mixing of religious and revolutionary terminology. He noted that the overriding anti-religious activists were those who were both closely connected with religion, such as former clergy, those with theological studies, that the previous "Builders of God" and "Seekers of God." Because of their influence, "... atheism was structured the way ..... just a religion was a religion of a particular type, a communist religion ...." The Kostelofskagia argued that it was necessary to transfer the control of anti-religious propaganda of these specialists in agitators of the working classes.
In answer to Pravda, the Giaroslavski not disputed that category, namely that those who were close to religion was responsible for the creation of a new communist anti-religion. He justified the promotion of a "folk-culture surrogate" as absolutely necessary given the low cultural level of the masses. He also claimed that the anti-religious propagandists "... should study the religion in depth, in order to understand it better." Throughout the course of the '20s and '30s, the lack of qualified permanent staff was an anti-religious profound obstacle to implementation of the Bolshevik plans for social transformation.
Party members in the province were very few and away from each other. The training and the level of "political education" have remained low, as found in the same periods of the Communist Party. For example, in Yaroslavl, the party said in May 1922 that ".. the shift to new forms of anti-religious propaganda hampered by the lack of adequate adequately measurable anti-religious propagandists." Another report stated that ".. the anti-religious activity suffers from lack of active members are able."
The Communists seemed rural (compared with their partners in cities) aneparkestera prepared to join the battle against religion as a skilled propagandists. May have been familiar and "kneaded" with orthodoxy under the environment and upbringing. Often criticized regularly throughout the course of the 20s and 30s for possession of images in their homes, because even baptized their children and marry in church. These dedicated communists rural apparently not understood and not clearly shown the contradiction between the communist ideology and religious behavior.
Having passed the period of maximum activity and growth from 1928 to 1931, the Union of atheists fell quickly as the mid-'30s, almost to its collapse. But in the late '30s, the "Terror" and accompanied by a brief revival and renewal of the Union. From the previous central leadership of the Union remained the only Giaroslavski-Gkoumpelman and Olestsouk. The most apparent 'maverick' in this period was Nikolai Fentorovits Platonof, the former "innovators" Metropolitan of Leningrad, who in 1938 refused his ordination he became a regular speaker antireligious. He also worked as director of the "Museum of the history of religion and atheism" in Leningrad and published articles in "atheist".
The Union was in a particularly vulnerable position, since the end of the '20s began to change the methods of "cultural integration". Although the EU population grew tremendously during these years, the same pressures that led to the expulsion of former priests from the ranks of in the late '20s, eventually led to question the need for continuation. The homogenizing cultural policy launched by the Stalinists until the early part of the '30s were opposed to open, political institutions in the form of the Union.
According to the official rhetoric of regime, religion was no longer "definitively defeated." Therefore, the Union of atheists were no longer needed and quickly collapsed. So, while in the early 1930's technicians "bourgeois specialists" and even cultural "bourgeois specialists" were welcomed back to the "Soviet megalokardi community" instead was much less need for ideological specialists in the period of New Economic Policy (NEP) when they rapidly disappeared from the scene.
http://www.xryshaygh.com/index.php/e...n#.UB7ftfaPUbA
|
Last edited by Donald E. Pauly; August 5th, 2012 at 06:01 PM.
Reason: format
|