Beginning of life
He comes from a poor landowning family. He entered the law faculty of St. Petersburg University, but was soon involved in one of the political cases (the so-called “Ballod case”; for participating in student riots) and spent several months in the Peter and Paul Fortress, first in the form of arrest of a person under investigation, then by Senate verdict. When the university was reopened, Tkachev, without entering the number of students, passed the exam for a degree (1868).
Tkachev started writing very early. His first article ("On the trial for crimes against the laws of the press") was published in No. 6 of the magazine "Time" for 1862. Following that, in the "Time" and in the "Epoch" were placed in the years 1862-64 several more articles by Tkachev on various issues related to judicial reform. In 1863 and 1864 he also appeared in P. D. Boborykin's "Library for Reading"; Tkachev's first "statistical studies" (crime and punishment, poverty and charity) were placed here. At the end of 1865, he got along with G. E. Blagosvetlov and began to write in the Russian Word, and then in the Delo that replaced it. For revolutionary propaganda among students, he was imprisoned and was constantly under police supervision. During the student unrest in St. Petersburg in 1868-69, together with S. G. Nechaev, he led a radical minority. In the spring of 1869 he was again arrested and in July 1871 sentenced by the St. Petersburg Court of Justice to 1 year and 4 months in prison. After serving his sentence, he was exiled to his homeland, to Velikiye Luki, from where he soon emigrated.
Life in exile
Tkachev’s journalism, interrupted by his arrest, resumed in 1872. He again wrote in Del, under various pseudonyms ( P. Nikitin, P. N. Nionov, P. N. Lenten, P. Gr-li, P. Gracioli, All the same). In exile, he collaborated with the magazine Vperyod! ", joined a group of Polish-Russian emigrants, after a break with P. L. Lavrov, he began publishing the Nabat magazine in Geneva (1875-81), together with K. M. Tursky, he was one of the founders of the People's Liberation Society (1877 ), whose activity in Russia was insignificant. In the mid 1870s. became close to the French Blanquists, collaborated in their newspaper "Ni dieu, ni maitre" ("Neither God nor Master"). He expounded his political views in the Nabat magazine, published under his editorship in 1875-76, as well as in several brochures published abroad. Tkachev sharply diverged from the currents then dominant in emigre literature, the main spokesmen of which were P. L. Lavrov and M. A. Bakunin. He was a representative of the so-called "Jacobin" tendencies, opposite both Bakunin's anarchism and Lavrovsky's "Forward!" trend. I have written little in recent years. At the end of 1882, he fell seriously ill and spent the rest of his life in a psychiatric hospital. He died in 1886 in Paris, 41 years old ...
Literary activity
Tkachev was a very prominent figure in the extreme left wing of Russian journalism. In literature, he followed the ideas of the "sixties" and remained faithful to them until the end of his life. He differed from his other colleagues in the Russian Word and Delo in that he never took a great interest in natural science; his thought always revolved in the sphere of public questions. He wrote extensively on population statistics and economic statistics. The digital material that he had was very poor, but Tkachev knew how to use it. Back in the 1870s, he noticed that relationship between the growth of the peasant population and the size of the land allotment, which was subsequently firmly substantiated by P.P. The largest part of Tkachev's articles belongs to the field of literary criticism; in addition, for several years he led the department of "New Books" in the "Delo" (and earlier the "Bibliographic Leaflet" in the "Russian Word"). Tkachev's critical and bibliographic articles are purely journalistic in nature; it is an ardent preaching of well-known social ideals, a call to work for the realization of these ideals. According to his sociological views, Tkachev was an extreme and consistent "economic materialist." Almost for the first time in Russian journalism, the name of Karl Marx appears in his articles. Back in 1865, in the Russian Word (Bibliographic Sheet, No. 12), Tkachev wrote:
“All legal and political phenomena are nothing more than direct legal consequences of the phenomena of economic life; this legal and political life is, so to speak, a mirror in which the economic life of the people is reflected ... Back in 1859, the famous German exile Karl Marx formulated this view in the most precise and definite way.
To practical activities, in the name of the ideal of "social equality" Tkachev called "people of the future":
At present, all people are equal, but not all are equal, that is, not all are gifted with the same opportunity to bring their interests into balance - hence the struggle and anarchy ... Put everyone in the same conditions in relation to development and material security, and you will give everyone real actual equality , and not an imaginary, fictitious one, which was invented by scholastic lawyers with the deliberate goal of fooling the ignorant and deceiving the simpletons.
Russian word. - 1865. - No. XI, II section. - pp. 36-37
He was an ethical fatalist. The achievement of a social ideal, or at least a radical change for the better in the economic system of society, should have been, according to his views, the task of conscious social activity. "People of the future" in Tkachev's constructions occupied the same place as "thinking realists" in D. I. Pisarev. Before the idea of the common good, which should serve as the guiding principle of the behavior of people of the future, all the provisions of abstract morality and justice, all the requirements of the code of morality adopted by the bourgeois crowd, recede into the background. “Moral rules are established for the benefit of the hostel, and therefore observance of them is obligatory for everyone. But a moral rule, like everything in life, has a relative character, and its importance is determined by the importance of the interest for which it was created... Not all moral rules are equal, and moreover, “not only different rules can be different in their importance, even the importance of the same rule, in different cases of its application, can be modified indefinitely. When moral rules of unequal importance and social usefulness clash, one should not hesitate to give preference to the more important over the less important. This choice must be left to everyone; each person should be recognized "the right to treat the precepts of the moral law, in each particular case of its application, not dogmatically but critically"; otherwise, “our morality will be no different from the morality of the Pharisees who rebelled against the Teacher because on the Sabbath day he was engaged in healing the sick and instructing the people” (People of the future and heroes of the bourgeoisie // Delo. - 1868. - No. 3.).
Views of P. N. Tkachev
Tkachev's views were formed under the influence of the democratic and socialist ideology of the 50-60s of the XIX century. Tkachev rejected the idea of the "originality" of the Russian social system and argued that the post-reform development of the country was taking place in the direction of capitalism. He believed that the only way to prevent the victory of capitalism was to replace the bourgeois-economic principle with a socialist one. Like all populists, Tkachev linked the hope for the socialist future of Russia with the peasantry, communist "by instinct, by tradition", imbued with "the principles of communal ownership." But, unlike other populists, Tkachev believed that the peasantry, due to its passivity and obscurity, was unable to make a social revolution on its own, and the community could become a “cell of socialism” only after the existing state and social system was destroyed. In contrast to the apoliticalism that prevailed in the revolutionary movement, Tkachev developed the idea of a political revolution as the first step towards a social revolution. Following P. G. Zaichnevsky, he believed that the creation of a secret centralized and conspiratorial revolutionary organization is the most important guarantee of the success of a political revolution. The revolution, according to Tkachev, was reduced to the seizure of power and the establishment of the dictatorship of the "revolutionary minority", opening the way for "revolutionary-organizing activity", which, unlike "revolutionary-destructive", is carried out exclusively by persuasion. The preaching of political struggle, the demand for the organization of revolutionary forces, the recognition of the need for a revolutionary dictatorship distinguished Tkachev's concept from the ideas of M. A. Bakunin and P. L. Lavrov.
Tkachev called his philosophical views "realism", meaning by this "... a strictly real, reasonably scientific, and therefore very and highly human worldview" (Selected works on socio-political topics. - M., 1933. - T. 4. - S. 27). Speaking as an opponent of idealism, Tkachev identified it epistemologically with "metaphysics", and socially - with an ideological apology for the existing system. Tkachev made the value of any theory dependent on its attitude to social issues. Under the influence of the works of N. G. Chernyshevsky and, in part, K. Marx, Tkachev assimilated certain elements of the materialist understanding of history, recognized the “economic factor” as the most important lever of social development, and considered the historical process from the point of view of the struggle of the economic interests of individual classes. Guided by this principle, Tkachev criticized the subjective method in the sociology of P. L. Lavrov and N. K. Mikhailovsky, their theories of social progress. However, on the question of the role of the individual in history, Tkachev tended to be subjectivist. The qualitative feature of historical reality, according to Tkachev, is that it does not exist outside and apart from the activities of people. The individual appears in history as an active creative force, and since the limits of the possible in history are mobile, then individuals, the "active minority", can and must contribute "... to the process of development of social life, a lot of things that not only are not determined, but sometimes even strongly contradict both previous historical prerequisites, as well as given social conditions ... ”(Selected essays on socio-political topics. - M., 1933. - T. 3. - P. 193). Guided by this provision, Tkachev created his own scheme of the historical process, according to which the will of the "active minority" is the source of progress. This concept became the philosophical justification for Tkachev's theory of revolution.
In the field of literary criticism, Tkachev was a follower of N. G. Chernyshevsky, N. A. Dobrolyubov and D. I. Pisarev. Continuing the development of the theory of "real criticism", Tkachev demanded from a work of art a high ideological content and social significance. Tkachev often ignored the aesthetic merits of a work of art, erroneously assessed a number of modern literary works, accused I. S. Turgenev of distorting the picture of folk life, rejected the satire of M. E. Saltykov-Shchedrin, called L. N. Tolstoy "salon writer".
The populist revolutionaries of the late 1860s and early 1870s, who denied political revolution in the name of social revolution, rejected Tkachev's doctrine. Only at the end of the 1870s did the logic of the historical process lead the Narodnaya Volya to direct political action against the autocracy.
// Encyclopedic Dictionary of Brockhaus and Efron: in 86 volumes (82 volumes and 4 additional). - St. Petersburg. , 1890-1907.Russian literary critic and publicist, brother of Alexandra Annenskaya. Ideologist of the Jacobin trend in populism.
He comes from a poor landowning family. He entered the law faculty of St. Petersburg University, but was soon involved in one of the political cases (the so-called “Ballod case”; for participating in student riots) and spent several months in the Peter and Paul Fortress, first in the form of arrest of a person under investigation, then by Senate verdict. When the university was reopened, Tkachev, without entering the number of students, passed the exam for a degree (1868).
Tkachev started writing very early. His first article ("On the Trial for Crimes Against the Laws of the Press") was published in Vremya, No. 6, 1862. Following that, in "Vremya" and "Epoch" in 1862-64, several more articles by Tkachev were published on various issues related to judicial reform. In 1863 and 1864, Tkachev also wrote in P. D. Boborykin’s Library for Reading; Tkachev's first "statistical studies" (crime and punishment, poverty and charity) were placed here. At the end of 1865, Tkachev made friends with G. E. Blagosvetlov and began to write in the Russian Word, and then in the Delo that replaced it. For revolutionary propaganda among students, he was imprisoned and was constantly under police supervision. During the student unrest in St. Petersburg in 1868-69, together with S. G. Nechaev, he led a radical minority. In the spring of 1869, he was again arrested and in July 1871 sentenced by the St. Petersburg Court of Justice to 1 year and 4 months in prison. After serving his sentence, Tkachev was sent to his homeland, to Velikiye Luki, from where he soon emigrated abroad.
Life in exile
Tkachev's journalism, interrupted by his arrest, resumed in 1872. He again wrote in the "Case", but not under his own name, but under various pseudonyms (P. Nikitin, P. N. Nionov, P. N. Postny, P. Gr-li, P. Grachioli, All the same). In exile, he collaborated with the Vperyod! magazine, joined a group of Polish-Russian emigrants, after a break with P. L. Lavrov, he began publishing the Nabat magazine (1875-81), together with K. M. Tursky was one of the founders of " Society for the People's Liberation (1877), whose activity in Russia was insignificant. In the mid 1870s. became close to the French Blanquists, collaborated in their newspaper "Ni dieu, ni maitre" ("Neither God nor Master"). Tkachev developed his political views in several pamphlets published by him abroad, and in the Nabat magazine, published under his editorship in Geneva in 1875-76. Tkachev sharply diverged from the then dominant currents in emigre literature, the main exponents of which were P. L. Lavrov and M. A. Bakunin. He was a representative of the so-called "Jacobin" tendencies, opposite both Bakunin's anarchism and the direction of Lavrov's "Forward!". In the last years of his life, Tkachev wrote little. At the end of 1882, he fell seriously ill and spent the rest of his life in a psychiatric hospital. He died in 1886 in Paris, aged 41.
Literary activity
Tkachev was a very prominent figure in the extreme left wing of Russian journalism. In literature, he followed the ideas of the "sixties" and remained faithful to them until the end of his life. He differed from his other colleagues in the Russian Word and Delo in that he never took a great interest in natural science; his thought always revolved in the sphere of public questions. He wrote extensively on population statistics and economic statistics. The digital material that he had was very poor, but Tkachev knew how to use it. Back in the 1870s, he noticed that relationship between the growth of the peasant population and the size of the land allotment, which was subsequently firmly substantiated by P.P. Semyonov-Tian-Shansky (in his introduction to "Statistics of Land Property in Russia"). The largest part of Tkachev's articles belongs to the field of literary criticism; in addition, for several years he led the department of "New Books" in the "Delo" (and earlier the "Bibliographic Leaflet" in the "Russian Word"). Tkachev's critical and bibliographic articles are purely journalistic in nature; it is an ardent preaching of well-known social ideals, a call to work for the realization of these ideals. According to his sociological views, Tkachev was an extreme and consistent "economic materialist." Almost for the first time in Russian journalism, the name of Karl Marx appears in his articles. Back in 1865, in Russkoye Slovo (Bibliographic Sheet, No. 12), Tkachev wrote: “All legal and political phenomena are nothing more than direct legal consequences of the phenomena of economic life; this legal and political life is, so to speak, a mirror in which the economic life of the people is reflected ... Back in 1859, the famous German exile Karl Marx formulated this view in the most precise and definite way. To practical activity, in the name of the ideal of "social equality" ["At present, all people are equal, but not all are equal, that is, not everyone is gifted with the same opportunity to bring their interests into balance - hence the struggle and anarchy ... Put everyone in the same conditions with respect to to development and material security, and you will give everyone real, factual equality of rights, and not the imaginary, fictitious one that the scholastic lawyers invented with the deliberate goal of fooling the ignorant and deceiving the simpletons "(Russian Word. - 1865. - No. XI, II dep. - 36- 37 p.).], Tkachev called "the people of the future." He was not an economic fatalist. The achievement of a social ideal, or at least a radical change for the better in the economic system of society, should have been, according to his views, the task of conscious social activity. "People of the future" in Tkachev's constructions occupied the same place as "thinking realists" in D. I. Pisarev. Before the idea of the common good, which should serve as the guiding principle of the behavior of people of the future, all the provisions of abstract morality and justice, all the requirements of the code of morality adopted by the bourgeois crowd, recede into the background. “Moral rules are established for the benefit of the hostel, and therefore observance of them is obligatory for everyone. But a moral rule, like everything in life, has a relative character, and its importance is determined by the importance of the interest for which it was created... Not all moral rules are equal, and moreover, “not only different rules can be different in their importance, even the importance of the same rule, in different cases of its application, can be modified indefinitely. When moral rules of unequal importance and social usefulness clash, one should not hesitate to give preference to the more important over the less important. This choice must be left to everyone; each person should be recognized "the right to treat the precepts of the moral law, in each particular case of its application, not dogmatically but critically"; otherwise, “our morality will not differ in any way from the morality of the Pharisees who rebelled against the Teacher because on the Sabbath day he was engaged in healing the sick and instructing the people” (People of the future and heroes of the bourgeoisie // Case. - 1868. - No. 3.)
Views of P. N. Tkachev
Tkachev's views were formed under the influence of the democratic and socialist ideology of the 50-60s of the XIX century. Tkachev rejected the idea of the "originality" of the Russian social system and argued that the post-reform development of the country was taking place in the direction of capitalism. He believed that the only way to prevent the victory of capitalism was to replace the bourgeois-economic principle with a socialist one. Like all populists, Tkachev linked the hope for the socialist future of Russia with the peasantry, communist "by instinct, by tradition", imbued with "the principles of communal ownership." But, unlike other populists, Tkachev believed that the peasantry, due to its passivity and obscurity, was unable to make a social revolution on its own, and the community could become a “cell of socialism” only after the existing state and social system was destroyed. In contrast to the apoliticalism that prevailed in the revolutionary movement, Tkachev developed the idea of a political revolution as the first step towards a social revolution. Following P. G. Zaichnevsky, he believed that the creation of a secret centralized and conspiratorial revolutionary organization is the most important guarantee of the success of a political revolution. The revolution, according to Tkachev, was reduced to the seizure of power and the establishment of the dictatorship of the "revolutionary minority", opening the way for "revolutionary-organizing activity", which, unlike "revolutionary-destructive", is carried out exclusively by persuasion. The preaching of political struggle, the demand for the organization of revolutionary forces, the recognition of the need for a revolutionary dictatorship distinguished Tkachev's concept from the ideas of M. A. Bakunin and P. L. Lavrov.
Tkachev called his philosophical views "realism", meaning by this "... a strictly real, reasonably scientific, and therefore very and highly human worldview" (Selected works on socio-political topics. T. 4. - M., 1933. - S. 27). Speaking as an opponent of idealism, Tkachev identified it epistemologically with "metaphysics", and socially - with an ideological apology for the existing system. Tkachev made the value of any theory dependent on its attitude to social issues. Under the influence of the works of N. G. Chernyshevsky and, in part, K. Marx, Tkachev assimilated certain elements of the materialist understanding of history, recognized the “economic factor” as the most important lever of social development, and considered the historical process from the point of view of the struggle of the economic interests of individual classes. Guided by this principle, Tkachev criticized the subjective method in the sociology of P. L. Lavrov and N. K. Mikhailovsky, their theories of social progress. However, on the question of the role of the individual in history, Tkachev tended to be subjectivist. The qualitative feature of historical reality, according to Tkachev, is that it does not exist outside and apart from the activities of people. The individual appears in history as an active creative force, and since the limits of the possible in history are mobile, then individuals, the "active minority", can and must contribute "... to the process of development of social life, a lot of things that not only are not determined, but sometimes even strongly contradict both previous historical prerequisites, and given social conditions ... ”(Selected essays on socio-political topics. T. 3. - M., 1933. - P. 193). Guided by this provision, Tkachev created his own scheme of the historical process, according to which the will of the "active minority" is the source of progress. This concept became the philosophical justification for Tkachev's theory of revolution.
In the field of literary criticism, Tkachev was a follower of N. G. Chernyshevsky, N. A. Dobrolyubov and D. I. Pisarev. Continuing the development of the theory of "real criticism", Tkachev demanded from a work of art a high ideological content and social significance. Tkachev often ignored the aesthetic merits of a work of art, erroneously assessed a number of modern literary works, accused I. S. Turgenev of distorting the picture of folk life, rejected the satire of M. E. Saltykov-Shchedrin, called L. N. Tolstoy "salon writer".
The populist revolutionaries of the late 1860s and early 1870s, who denied political revolution in the name of social revolution, rejected Tkachev's doctrine. Only at the end of the 1870s did the logic of the historical process lead the Narodnaya Volya to direct political action against the autocracy.
Ideologist conspiratorial (Blanquist) direction in populism became Petr Nikitovich Tkachev(1844 - 1885). He was born into a small estate noble family in the Velikoluksky district of the Pskov province, where his father had a small estate.
Tkachev's name is associated with many speeches of the revolutionary youth of the 1860s, and his biography is typical for a representative of this social group. Becoming a student at St. Petersburg University in 1861, Tkachev immediately entered the seething student environment. So, during 1861 - 1866. he was arrested four times for participating in student political organizations. In 1865, he was invited as an employee to the Russian Word instead of the arrested Pisarev (the magazine was closed after Karakozov's assassination attempt on Alexander II). Soon Tkachev becomes close to a secret society. "People's massacre", headed by S.G. Nechaev. With their direct participation, the "Revolutionary Action Program". In 1869, he fell into the hands of the Third Division in the infamous "Nechaev case." In 1873, Tkachev fled from police surveillance abroad. By this time, behind him there was not only a significant revolutionary experience, but also experience in literary work. Thanks to this, he earned a reputation as a strong and bright writer, writing on economic-legal and literary-critical topics. Soon after escaping abroad, he gets a job in the Vperyod magazine led by P. Lavrov, but soon leaves it due to ideological differences with the editor-in-chief. In 1875, together with a group of like-minded people, he began publishing the journal "Nabat", which oriented the revolutionaries to the deployment of a political struggle with the aim of seizing power by the party of the "intellectual minority".
However, the bright career of the Russian thinker-revolutionary is interrupted by a severe mental illness, which leads to his premature death. This, however, did not diminish the significance of his legacy. The most striking works of Tkachev - journalistic articles "Revolution and State" (1876), "People and Revolution", "The Anarchist State", "Is a Social Revolution Possible in Russia at the Present Time", "Social Relations in Russia" (1875), "Open Letter to Friedrich Engels"(1874) and others.
As for the ideological position of Tkachev, he generally accepted the Marxist teaching, but considered it incomplete, and therefore supplemented it with provisions from bourgeois political and legal thought. Along with this, he demanded that national specifics be taken into account when building socialism in Russia. So, in particular, he wrote in one of his letters to Engels: "We need a very special revolutionary program, which should differ from the German one to the extent that the socio-political conditions of Russia differ from Germany."
The main points of the political and legal doctrine of P.N. Tkachev are as follows:
1) The Russian state is devoid of roots in economic life, and does not embody the interests of any class;
More specifically, this means that it weighs equally on all social classes, and they hate it equally.
2) Revolutionary propaganda among the people does not make sense, since they are so oppressed and crushed that they simply will not accept it;
The latter is exacerbated by the conservative nature of the peasantry, which constitutes the majority of society.
3) Political persecution excludes legal work among the proletariat and hinders its political maturation;
4) Since propaganda and any legal activity is ineffective, the only way out is the revolutionary struggle against the autocracy;
5) At the same time, the separation of state power from the social base makes it easier for the revolutionaries to seize it and subsequently use it for their own purposes;
6) The leading force of the revolution in the conditions of Russia must become a conscious minority, united by discipline into a centralized party;
7) The party is called upon to seize the supreme power in society with the help of a conspiracy, in addition to which a popular revolt "from below" must be organized;
8) The main thing for Russian revolutionaries is not to be late with the rebellion, since the development of capitalism and the collapse of the commune strengthen the reaction and weaken the socialist principles in the Russian people;
9) After the revolution, the state is not abolished, but turns into a state of "revolutionary dictatorship", which implements the following revolutionary transformations:
a) the socialization of the means of production and the transformation of rural communities into a community - a commune;
b) the abolition of trade and the introduction of direct distribution and exchange of products;
c) elimination of family, physical, mental and moral inequality;
d) weakening of the central state power through the creation of self-government bodies.
10) The new socialist society will be based on the principles of equality, not anarchy (“... and equality, and anarchy, and freedom - all these concepts are combined in one concept, in one word “slavery”).
Tkachev's program provided the rationale for one of the directions of populism. The number of her followers by the end of the 1870s. has increased significantly. To a certain extent, under its influence, the tendencies towards political struggle, understood in the spirit of conspiracy, began to intensify in Earth and Freedom. In the eyes of the populists, who suffered a number of major setbacks during the period of "going to the people" for the purpose of socialist propaganda (lavryism) and rebellious agitation (bakuninism), Tkachev's clear plan began to appear more and more realistic with a minimum expenditure of time and effort. Later, quite independently of Tkachev, the Narodniks were drawn into terror by the logic of the struggle.
At the same time, the classics of Marxism were critical of Tkachev's legacy. F. Engels, in a number of articles written in 1874-1875, subjected Tkachev to severe criticism, pointing out the danger and harm of his inherent adventurism, refusal to work hard to attract the broad working masses to the side of the revolution.
In recent decades, the activities and ideas of P.N. Tkachev have been of particular interest both in the USSR and in the West. In the 1920s. some Soviet scientists, in particular M.N. Pokrovsky, portrayed him as the first Russian Marxist who recognized the primacy of economic relations over the political and ideological superstructure.
In the West, a heightened interest in Tkachev is associated with the study of the origins of Bolshevism and its revolutionary strategy and tactics: after all, from the ideas and actions of people who at one time seemed like eccentrics - loners, a movement grew that changed the face of the world in the 20th century. In particular, the book of the American historian published in 1968 A.L. Weeks that's what it's called: First Bolshevik. Political biography of Peter Tkachev».
©2015-2019 site
All rights belong to their authors. This site does not claim authorship, but provides free use.
Page creation date: 2016-02-16
Tkachev Petr Nikitich- Tkachev (Pyotr Nikitich) - writer.
Born in 1844 in the Pskov province, in a poor landowner's family. He entered the law faculty of St. Petersburg University, but soon, for participating in student riots, he ended up in the Kronstadt fortress, where he spent several months.
When the university was reopened, Tkachev, without entering the number of students, passed the exam for a degree.
Involved in one of the political cases (the so-called "Ballod case"), Tkachev spent several months in the Peter and Paul Fortress, first in the form of the arrest of a person under investigation, then by the verdict of the Senate.
Tkachev started writing very early. His first article ("On the trial for crimes against the laws of the press") was published in ¦ 6 of the journal "Vremya" for 1862. After that, in "Vremya" and in "Epoch", in 1862 - 64, several more articles were published Tkachev on various issues related to judicial reform.
In 1863 and 1864, Tkachev also wrote in the "Library for Reading" P.D. Boborykin; among other things, Tkachev's first "statistical studies" (crime and punishment, poverty and charity) were placed here.
At the end of 1865, Tkachev got along with G.E. Blagosvetlov and began to write in the "Russian Word", and then in the "Deed" that replaced it.
In the spring of 1869, he was again arrested and in July 1871 sentenced by the St. Petersburg judicial chamber to 1 year and 4 months in prison (in the so-called "Nechaev case").
After serving his sentence, Tkachev was exiled to Velikiye Luki, from where he soon emigrated abroad.
Tkachev's journalism, interrupted by his arrest, resumed in 1872. He again wrote in Del, but not under his last name, but under various pseudonyms (P. Nikitin, P.N. Nionov, P.N. Postny, P. Gr-li , P. Gracioli, All the same). Tkachev was a very prominent figure in the group of writers on the extreme left wing of Russian journalism.
He possessed an undoubted and uncommon literary talent; His articles are written in a lively, sometimes fascinating way.
Clarity and strict consistency of thought, turning into a certain straightforwardness, make Tkachev's articles especially valuable for getting acquainted with the mental currents of that period of Russian social life, to which the heyday of his literary activity belongs.
Tkachev sometimes did not finish his conclusions only for censorship reasons.
Within the limits that were allowed by external conditions, he dotted all i, no matter how paradoxical the positions he defended might seem at times.
Tkachev was brought up on the ideas of the "sixties" and remained faithful to them until the end of his life. He differed from his other colleagues in the "Russian Word" and "Deed" in that he was never fond of natural science; his thought always revolved in the sphere of public questions.
He wrote extensively on population statistics and economic statistics.
The digital material that he had was very poor, but Tkachev knew how to use it.
Back in the 70s, he noticed that relationship between the growth of the peasant population and the size of the land allotment, which was subsequently firmly substantiated by P.P. Semenov (in his introduction to "Statistics of Land Property in Russia").
The largest part of Tkachev's articles belongs to the field of literary criticism; in addition, for several years he led the department of "New Books" in the "Delo" (and earlier the "Bibliographic Sheet" in the "Russian Word").
Tkachev's critical and bibliographic articles are purely journalistic in nature; it is an ardent preaching of well-known social ideals, a call to work for the realization of these ideals.
According to his sociological views, Tkachev was an extreme and consistent "economic materialist".
Almost for the first time in Russian journalism, the name of Marx appears in his articles.
As early as 1865, in Russkoye Slovo (Bibliographic Sheet, ¦ 12), Tkachev wrote: “All legal and political phenomena are nothing more than direct legal consequences of the phenomena of economic life; this legal and political life is, so to speak, a mirror which reflects the economic life of the people ...
Back in 1859, the famous German exile Karl Marx formulated this view in the most precise and definite way.
To practical activity, in the name of the ideal of "social equality" *), Tkachev called "the people of the future."
He was not an economic fatalist.
The achievement of a social ideal, or at least a radical change for the better in the economic system of society, should have been, according to his views, the task of conscious social activity.
"People of the future" in Tkachev's constructions occupied the same place as "thinking realists" in Pisarev's. Before the idea of the common good, which should serve as the guiding principle of the behavior of people of the future, all the provisions of abstract morality and justice, all the requirements of the code of morality adopted by the bourgeois crowd, recede into the background.
“Moral rules are established for the benefit of the hostel, and therefore their observance is obligatory for everyone.
But a moral rule, like everything in life, has a relative character and its importance is determined by the importance of the interest for which it was created....
Not all moral rules are equal" and, moreover, "not only different rules can be different in their importance, but even the importance of one and the same rule, in different cases of its application, can change ad infinitum."
When moral rules of unequal importance and social usefulness clash, one should not hesitate to give preference to the more important over the less important.
This choice must be left to everyone; each person must be recognized "the right to treat the precepts of the moral law, in each particular case of its application, not dogmatically, but critically"; otherwise, “our morality will not differ in any way from the morality of the Pharisees who rebelled against the Teacher because on the Sabbath day he was engaged in healing the sick and instructing the people” (“Delo”, 1868, ¦ 3, “People of the future and heroes of the bourgeoisie”).
Tkachev developed his political views in several pamphlets published by him abroad, and in the Nabat magazine, published under his editorship in Geneva, in 1875-76. Tkachev sharply diverged from the currents then dominant in emigre literature, the main spokesmen of which were P.L. Lavrov and M.A. Bakunin.
He was a representative of the so-called "Jacobin" tendencies, which were opposite to both Bakunin's anarchism and Lavrovsky's "Forward" trend.
In the last years of his life, Tkachev wrote little. In 1883 he became mentally ill and died in 1885, in Paris, at the age of 41. Tkachev's articles, more characterizing his literary physiognomy: "The Case", 1867 - "The productive forces of Russia.
Statistical Essays" (1867, ¦ 2, 3, 4); "New Books" (¦ 7, 8, 9, 11, 12); "German Idealists and Philistines" (in reference to Scherr's book: "Deutsche Cuktur und Sittengeschichte" ¦ 10, 11, 12) 1868 - "People of the Future and Heroes of Philistinism" (¦ 4 and 5); "Rising Forces" (about the novels by V.A. Sleptsov, Marko Vovchka, M.V. Avdeev - ¦ 9 and 10) "Broken Illusions" (about Reshetnikov's novels - ¦ 11, 12). 1869 - "Regarding Daul's book "Women's Labor" and my article" The Women's Question "(¦ 2). 1872 - "Unthinking thoughts" (about the writings of N. Uspensky, ¦ 1); "Unfinished People" (about Kushchevsky's novel: "Nikolai Negorev", ¦ 2 - 3); "Statistical Notes to the Theory of Progress" (¦ 3); "Saved and Saving" (in reference to Boborykin's novel: "Solid Virtues", ¦ 10); "Unfinished antiquity" (about the novel "Three Countries of the World", Nekrasov and Stanitsky, and about Turgenev's stories, ¦ 11 - 12). 1873 - "Statistical Essays on Russia" (¦ 1, 4, 5, 7, 10); "Tendentious novel" [on the subject of "Collected Works" by A. Mikhailov (Scheller), ¦ 2, 6, 7]; "Sick People" (about "Demons" by F.M. Dostoevsky, ¦ 3, 4); "Prison and its principles" (¦ 6, 8). 1875 - "Fictional writers-empiricists and fiction writers-metaphysics" (about the works of Kushchevsky, Gl. Uspensky, Boborykin, S. Smirnova, ¦ 3, 5, 7); "The Role of Thought in History" (in reference to "Experiments in the History of Thought" by P. Mirtov, ¦ 9, 12). 1876 - "Literary Potpourri" (about the novels: "Two Worlds", Aleeva, "In the Wilderness" by M. Vovchka, "Teenager" by Dostoevsky and "Strength of Character", S.I. Smirnova, ¦ 4, 5, 6); "French Society at the End of the 18th Century" (regarding Taine's book, ¦ 3, 5, 7); "Will a small loan help us" (¦ 12). 1877 - "The Idealist of Philistinism" (in connection with the work of Avdeev, ¦ 1); "Balanced Souls" (in reference to Turgenev's novel "Nov", ¦ 2 - 4); "On the Benefits of Philosophy" (on the writings of A.A. Kozlov and V.V. Lesevich, ¦ 5); "Edgar Quinet, critical biographical sketch" (¦ 6 - 7); 1878 - "Harmless satire" (about Shchedrin's book: "In the environment of moderation and accuracy", ¦ 1); "Salon Art" (about "Anna Karenina" by Tolstoy, ¦ 2 and 4); "Minehouses of Wisdom of Russian Philosophers" (in reference to "Letters on Scientific Philosophy" by VV Lesevich, ¦ 10, 11). 1879 - "A Man in the Salons of Modern Fiction" [on the writings of Ivanov (Uspensky), Zlatovratsky, Vologdin (Zasodimsky) and A. Potekhin, ¦ 3, 6, 7, 8, 9]; "Optimism in Science. Dedicated to the Free Economic Society" (¦ 6); "The only Russian sociologist" (on De Roberti's "Sociology", ¦ 12). 1880 - "Utilitarian principle in moral philosophy" (¦ 1); "Rotten Roots" (about the composition of V. Krestovsky, ¦ 2, 3, 7, 8). N.F. Annensky.
Tkachev Petr Nikitich
- writer. Genus. in 1844 in the Pskov province., In a poor landowner's family. He entered the Faculty of Law of St. Petersburg. university, but soon ended up in the Kronstadt fortress for participating in student riots, where he spent several months. When the university was reopened, T., not entering the number of students, passed the exam for a degree. Attracted to one of the political cases (the so-called "Ballod case"), T. spent several months in the Peter and Paul Fortress, first in the form of arrest of a person under investigation, then by the verdict of the Senate. T. began to write very early. His first article ("On the trial for crimes against the laws of the press") was published in No. 6 of the journal "Vremya" for 1862. a few more articles by T. on various issues related to judicial reform. In 1863 and 1864, T. also wrote in P. D. Boborykin’s Library for Reading; here were placed, among other things, the first "statistical studies" T. (crime and punishment, poverty and charity). At the end of 1865, Mr.. T. made friends with G. E. Blagosvetlov and began to write in the "Russian Word", and then in the "Deed" that replaced it. In the spring of 1869 he was again arrested and in July 1871 sentenced in St. Petersburg. by a judicial chamber to 1 year and 4 months in prison (according to the so-called "Nechaevsky case"). After serving his sentence, T. was exiled to Velikiye Luki, from where he soon emigrated abroad. T.’s journalism, interrupted by his arrest, resumed in 1872. He again wrote in Del, but not under his last name, but under various pseudonyms (P. Nikitin, P. N. Nionov, P. N. Postny, P. Gr- Li, P. Gracioli, All the same). T. was a very prominent figure in the group of writers of the extreme left wing of Russian journalism. He possessed an undoubted and uncommon literary talent; His articles are written in a lively, sometimes fascinating way. Clarity and strict consistency of thought, turning into a certain straightforwardness, make T.'s articles especially valuable for getting acquainted with the mental currents of that period of Russian social life, to which the heyday of his literary activity belongs. T. sometimes did not finish his conclusions only for censorship reasons. Within the limits that were allowed by external conditions, he put all the dots over and, no matter how paradoxical the positions he defended at times may seem, T. was brought up on the ideas of the "sixties" and remained faithful to them until the end of his life. He differed from his other colleagues in the "Russian Word" and "Delo" in that he was never fond of natural science; his thought always revolved in the sphere of public questions. He wrote extensively on population statistics and economic statistics. The digital material that he had was very poor, but T. knew how to use it. Back in the 70s. he noticed the relationship between the growth of the peasant population and the size of the land allotment, which was subsequently firmly substantiated by P. P. Semenov (in his introduction to "Statistics of land ownership in Russia"). Most of T.'s articles belong to the field of literary criticism; in addition, for several years he led the department of "New Books" in the "Delo" (and earlier the "Bibliographic Sheet" in the "Russian Word"). T.'s critical and bibliographic articles are purely journalistic in nature; it is an ardent preaching of well-known social ideals, a call to work for the realization of these ideals. According to his sociological views T. was an extreme and consistent "economic materialist". Almost for the first time in Russian journalism, the name of Marx appears in his articles. As early as 1865, in Russkoye Slovo (Bibliograph. Sheet, No. 12), T. wrote: “All legal and political phenomena are nothing more than direct legal consequences of the phenomena of economic life; this legal and political life is, so to speak, , a mirror that reflects the economic life of the people ... Back in 1859, the famous German exile Karl Marx formulated this view in the most accurate and definite way. To practical activity, in the name of the ideal of "social equality" ["At present, all people are equal, but not all are equal, that is, not all are gifted with the same opportunity to bring their interests into balance - hence the struggle and anarchy ... Put everyone in equal conditions in relation to development and material security, and you will give everyone real, factual equality of rights, and not the imaginary, fictitious one that was invented by scholastic lawyers with the deliberate goal of fooling the ignorant and deceiving the simpletons "(" Russkoye Slovo ", 1865, No. XI, II department ., 36-7).], T. called "the people of the future". He was not an economic fatalist. The achievement of a social ideal, or at least a radical change for the better in the economic system of society, should have been, according to his views, the task of conscious social activity. "People of the future" in the constructions of T. occupied the same place as "thinking realists" in . Before the idea of the common good, which should serve as the guiding principle of the behavior of people of the future, all the provisions of abstract morality and justice, all the requirements of the code of morality adopted by the bourgeois crowd, recede into the background. “Moral rules have been established for the benefit of the community, and therefore observance of them is mandatory for everyone. But a moral rule, like everything everyday, has a relative character, and its importance is determined by the importance of the interest for which it was created ... Not all moral rules are equal between itself", and, moreover, "not only different rules can be different in their importance, but even the importance of one and the same rule, in different cases of its application, can change ad infinitum". When moral rules of unequal importance and social usefulness clash, one should not hesitate to give preference to the more important over the less important. This choice must be left to everyone; each person must be recognized "the right to treat the precepts of the moral law, in each particular case of its application, not dogmatically but critically"; otherwise, "our morality will not differ in any way from the morality of the Pharisees who rebelled against the Teacher because on the Sabbath day he was engaged in healing the sick and instructing the people" ("Delo", 1868, No. 3, "People of the Future and Heroes of Philistinism"). T. developed his political views in several brochures published by him abroad, and in the Nabat magazine, published under his editorship in Geneva in 1875-76. T. sharply diverged from the trends then dominant in emigre literature, the main spokesmen of which were and. He was the representative of the so-called. "Jacobin" tendencies, opposite to both anarchism and the "Forward" direction. In the last years of his life T. wrote little. In 1883 he became mentally ill and died in 1885 in Paris, aged 41. Articles T., more characterizing his literary physiognomy: "Case", 1867 - "The productive forces of Russia. Statistical essays" (1867, Nos. 2, 3, 4); "New Books" (Nos. 7, 8, 9, 11, 12); "German Idealists and Philistines" (in reference to Scherr's "Deutsche Cultur und Sittengeschichte", Nos. 10, 11, 12). 1868 - "People of the Future and Heroes of Philistinism" (Nos. 4 and 5); "Rising Forces" (about the novels by V. A. Sleptsov, Marko Vovchka, M. V. Avdeev - Nos. 9 and 10); "Broken Illusions" (about Reshetnikov's novels - Nos. 11, 12). 1869 - "Regarding Daul's book "Women's Labor" and my article" The Women's Question" (No. 2). 1872 - "Unthinking Thoughts" (about the writings of N. Uspensky, No. 1); "Unfinished People" (about Kushchevsky's novel "Nikolai Negorev", Nos. 2-3); "Statistical Notes on the Theory of Progress" (No. 3); "The Saved and the Rescued" (on Boborykin's novel: Solid Virtues, No. 10); "Unpainted Antiquity" (about the novel " Three countries of the world" by Nekrasov and Stanitsky and about Turgenev's stories, Nos. 11-12). 1873 - "Statistical Essays on Russia" (Nos. 4, 5, 7, 10); "Tendentious Romance" [on the subject of A. Mikhailov's (Scheller's) Collected Works, Nos. 2, 6, 7]; "Sick People" (about "Demons", Nos. 3, 4); "Prison and its principles" (Nos. 6, 8). 1875 - "Fictionists-empiricists and fiction writers-metaphysics" (about the works of Kushchevsky, Gl. Uspensky, Boborykin, S. Smirnova, Nos. 3, 5, 7); "The Role of Thought in History" (in connection with "Experience in the History of Thought", Nos. 9, 12). 1876 - "Literary Potpourri" (about the novels: "Two Worlds" by Aleeva, "In the Wilderness" by M. Vovchka, "Teenager" by Dostoevsky and "Strength of Character" by S. I. Smirnova, Nos. 4, 5, 6); "French Society at the End of the 18th Century" (regarding Tan's book, nos. 3, 5, 7); "Will a small loan help us" (No. 12). 1877 - "The Idealist of Philistinism" (in connection with the work of Avdeev, No. 1); "Balanced Souls" (in reference to Turgenev's novel "Nov", No. 2-4); "On the Usefulness of Philosophy" (in connection with Op. and, No. 5); "Edgar Quinet, critical biographical essay" (Nos. 6-7). 1878 - "Harmless satire" (about Prince Shchedrin: "In the environment of confidence and accuracy", No. 1); "Salon Art" (about "Anna Karenina" by Tolstoy, No. 2 and 4); "Founders of Wisdom of Russian Philosophers" (in connection with "Letters on Scientific Philosophy", No. 10, 11). 1879 - "A Man in the Salons of Modern Fiction" [on the essays. Ivanov (Uspensky), Zlatovratsky, Vologdin (Zasodimsky) and A. Potekhin, No. 3, 6, 7, 8, 9]; "Optimism in Science. Dedicated to Voln. Economic Society" (No. 6); "The only Russian sociologist" (about "Sociology", No. 12). 1880 - "The utilitarian principle in moral philosophy" (No. 1); "Rotten Roots" (about the composition of V. Krestovsky pseudonym., Nos. 2, 3, 7, 8).
Tkachev Petr Nikitich
Russian revolutionary, ideologist of the Jacobin trend in populism, literary critic and publicist. From the petty nobility. He graduated as an external student from the law faculty of St. Petersburg University (1868), began his literary activity in 1862. From 1865 he collaborated in the journal Russkoye Slovo and Delo under the pseudonym P. Nikitin, P. Nionov, All the same, and others. For revolutionary propaganda among students subjected to imprisonment, was constantly under the supervision of the police. During student unrest in St. Petersburg in 1868-69, together with S. G. Nechaev, he led a radical minority. Arrested in 1869, sued in the "process of Nechaevites", after serving a prison sentence he was sent to his homeland. In 1873 he fled abroad. In exile, he collaborated in the Vperyod! magazine, joined a group of Polish-Russian emigrants (see Russian Jacobins), after a break with began publishing the Nabat magazine (1875-81), together with K. M. Tursky was one of the founders "Society of People's Liberation" (1877), whose activity in Russia was insignificant. In the mid 1870s. became close to the French Blanquists, collaborated in their newspaper "Ni dieu, ni maìtre" ("Neither God nor Master"). At the end of 1882 he fell seriously ill and spent the last years in a psychiatric hospital.
T.'s views were formed under the influence of the democratic and socialist ideology of the 1950s and 1960s. 19th century T. rejected the idea of "originality" of the Russian social system and argued that the post-reform development of the country is taking place in the direction of capitalism. He believed that the only way to prevent the victory of capitalism was to replace the bourgeois-economic principle with a socialist one. Like all populists, T. linked hope for a socialist future in Russia with the peasantry, communist "by instinct, by tradition," imbued with the "principles of communal ownership." But, unlike other populists, T. believed that the peasantry, due to its passivity and obscurity, was incapable of independently carrying out a social revolution, and the community could become a “cell of socialism” only after the existing state and social system was destroyed. In contrast to the apoliticalism that prevailed in the revolutionary movement, T. developed the idea of a political revolution as the first step towards a social revolution. Following P. G. Zaichnevsky, he believed that the creation of a secret centralized and conspiratorial revolutionary organization is the most important guarantee of the success of a political revolution. The revolution, according to T., was reduced to the seizure of power and the establishment of the dictatorship of the "revolutionary minority", opening the way for "revolutionary-organizing activity", which, in contrast to "revolutionary-destructive", is carried out exclusively by persuasion. The preaching of a political struggle, the demand for the organization of revolutionary forces, and the recognition of the need for a revolutionary dictatorship distinguished the concept of t. from the ideas of and.
T. called his philosophical views “realism”, meaning by this “... a strictly real, reasonably scientific, and therefore very and highly human worldview” (Selected works on socio-political topics, vol. 4, 1933, p. .27). Opposing idealism, T. identified it in epistemological terms with "metaphysics", and in social terms - with the ideological apology of the existing system. T. made the value of any theory dependent on its relationship to social issues. Under the influence of the works and partly of K. Marx, T. adopted certain elements of the materialist understanding of history, recognized the “economic factor” as the most important lever of social development, and considered the historical process from the point of view of the struggle of the economic interests of individual classes. Guided by this principle, T. criticized the subjective method in sociology and their theories of social progress. However, on the question of the role of the individual in history, T. leaned toward subjectivism. The qualitative feature of historical reality, according to T., is that it does not exist outside and apart from the activity of people. The individual appears in history as an active creative force, and since the limits of the possible in history are mobile, individuals, the “active minority”, can and must contribute “... to the development of social life a lot of things that not only are not determined, but sometimes even decisively contradicts both the previous historical prerequisites and the given social conditions ... ”(Selected works on socio-political topics, vol. 3, 1933, p. 193). Guided by this position, T. created his own scheme of the historical process, according to which the source of progress is the will of the "active minority". This concept became the philosophical basis for T.
In the field of literary criticism, T. acted as a follower, and. Continuing the development of the theory of "real criticism", T. demanded from a work of art a high ideological content and social significance. T. often ignored the aesthetic merits of a work of art, erroneously assessed a number of contemporary literary works, accused I. S. Turgenev of distorting the picture of folk life, rejected the satire of M. E. Saltykov-Shchedrin, and called him a “salon writer.”
The Narodnik revolutionaries of the late 1860s and early 1870s, who denied the political revolution in the name of the social one, rejected the doctrine of T. Only in the late 1870s. the logic of the historical process led the Narodnaya Volya to direct political action against the autocracy. “The attempt to seize power, prepared by Tkachev’s sermon and carried out by means of a “terrifying and truly frightening terror, was majestic…” wrote (Poln. sobr. soch., 5th ed., vol. 6, p. 173). Highly appreciating the merits of T. and the Narodnaya Volya, he criticized the conspiratorial tactics of Blanquism (see ibid., vol. 13, p. 76). The defeat of Narodnaya Volya essentially meant the defeat of T.'s theory and, at the same time, the collapse of the Jacobin (Blanquist) trend in the Russian revolutionary movement.
Works: Soch., vol. 1-2, M., 1975-76; Fav. soch., v.1-6, M., 1932-37; Fav. lit.-critical articles, M. - L., 1928.
Lit .: Engels F., Emigrant literature, Marx K. and Engels F., Soch., 2nd ed., v.18, p.518-48; ., What to do?, Full. coll. soch., 5th ed., vol. 6, pp. 173-74; , Our Disagreements, Fav. philosophy Prod., vol. 1, M., 1956; Kozmin B.P., P.N. Tkachev and the revolutionary movement of the 1860s, M., 1922; his, From the history of revolutionary thought in Russia, M., 1961; his, Literature and history, M., 1969; Reuel A.L., Russian economic thought of the 60-70s. 19th century and Marxism, M., 1956; Sedov M. G., Some problems of the history of Blanquism in Russia. [Revolutionary Doctrine of P. N. Tkachev], "Questions of History", 1971, No. 10; P. N. Tkachev, in the book: History of Russian literature of the XIX century. Bibliographic index, M. - L., 1962, p. 675-76; P. N. Tkachev, in the book: Populism in the works of Soviet researchers for 1953-70. Index of Literature, M., 1971, p. 39-41; P. N. Tkachev, in: History of Russian Philosophy. Index of literature published in the USSR in Russian for 1917-1967, part 3, M., 1975, p. 732-35.
B. M. Shakhmatov.
Great Soviet Encyclopedia. - M.: Soviet Encyclopedia. 1969-1978.
