You can apply to participate by submitting a form. After the registration, all participants will receive details for accessing the Zoom meetings.
The author of the new book on the participation of Yugoslav volunteers in International brigades during the Spanish Civil War was asked if there were lessons to be learned about today’s fascism from the period he studied (1). He answered that it is maybe better to consult historians that are researching XIX century, because the XX century world order, informed crucially by the October revolution and its global emancipatory consequences, seems to be erased. At least there are no world-wide empowered and inspired working-class movements, institutions and organizations that would threaten the capitalist order. Indeed, a political background and profile of Trump resembles (so far) much more a background and profile of Louis Bonaparte than those of Mussolini or Hitler.
Let’s take a glance on Jeremy Corbin’s Right to Own program. Simply put, it was a plan for a government loan to the workers in order to buy out the companies in which they work. The loan was to be returned in the period of 50 years. Wait, but it resembles nothing else but the program of The Emancipation reform in Russia of 1961. Similarly, the government loan to peasants to enable them to buy out the land from aristocracy was to be returned in the period of 50 years. Both reforms counted on a sort of a coop as a means of support. Workers-owned coops in the Right to Own and village communes/cooperatives in the Emancipation reform. Even Karl Marx was in a doubt if village cooperative might be a side road to a more just society and a short cut between feudalism and socialism.
If all this sounds strange, let’s remind ourselves that through his analyses of today’s capitalism and its self-generated myth of meritocracy Tomas Piketty triggered a debate in which was concluded that social mobility after the demise of the socialist project in Europe returned to the level of XVI century England. That big is the general chance for upward moving.
The structures of deprivation and disintegration of working class are surviving while ideas, goals and achievements of revolutionary movements of XX century and even those of previous centuries (2) seem to be buried and forgotten. Maybe it is time to try revisiting or reinventing them.
To Chernyshevsky’s book were ascribed epithets of a gospel, a pamphlet, a rational egoism agenda, a handy revolutionary agenda, an obscenity guide for youth, the cooperative planning scheme, an idealist socialist utopia, a bad non-modern novel, a superstructure text with unparalleled depth and width. Whatever it was and is, it was the crucial text for the revolutionary thought and deed that inspired actors of October revolution and thus also informed a lot of XX century ongoing and bygones. It provided revolutionary actors with rational, moral and practical guidelines to emancipation.
The Turgenev’s Fathers and Sons (really the teaser for Chernyshevsky’s book) we discussed in our reading group through the following pattern: a) artistic impression b) importance for the world-system theory and situation c) relevance for the history, theory and practice of cooperative work, and d) telling details. Interacting and intersecting views, opinions and conclusions enriched everyone’s understanding of specific and general issues staged by Turgenev’s novel. The cooperation in reading unveiled obvious and even shocking resemblance and vividness of characters, dialogues, ideological positions and conflictual situations to today’s global and local phenomenon, especially those related to the position of the middle class at the capitalist periphery and semi-periphery. Not surprisingly, the individuals and societies in the same positions in the world economic system tend to show the same patterns and positions in intellectual reflections. Today’s peripheries and semi peripheries include not only the Third and the former Second World but also the center of the world capitalist system, be it for the inherited statuses of internal peripheries or for the subordination to the economic pace and might of growing economic power in the East, out of the realm of the capitalist center so far. According to the research in the US, more and more young people give up the college and the ones that invested so much in their education cannot find the job and secure decent existence, at least nothing that resembles the one of their parents. Theirs for their society so precious knowledge and skills people are hardly finding the place in that same society. Isn’t that a typical raznochintsy situation? Isn’t that worth of checking theirs/ours historical challenges and experiences, cooperatively conceiving the renewed history of today?
P.S. A message from AI:
Nikolai Chernyshevsky outlined his pioneering theory of cooperatives primarily in his 1860 article ”Capital and Labor” and his ”Studies on Political Economy (according to Mill)“. He viewed cooperative partnerships (artels) as the foundational mechanism to transition society from capitalism to an equitable, socialist industrial economy without relying on violent revolution.
Chernyshevsky’s cooperative theories are defined by several core principles:
Scientific Basis: He adapted utopian socialist concepts and the theories of English economist John Stuart Mill to the Russian material reality.
Equitable Distribution: Chernyshevsky argued that the core economic problem was distribution over production. He asserted that voluntary associations would allow workers to bypass exploitative middlemen and retain the full value of their labor.
The Peasant Commune (Obshchina): He championed the traditional agrarian commune as an indigenous Russian structure that could serve as the “seed” for advanced cooperative production, avoiding full capitalist intermediation.
Emancipation & Education: True cooperation requires the full emancipation of women (securing them economic independence) and scientific education to harness societal abundance.
These theoretical ideas were famously immortalized in his 1863 novel What Is to Be Done?, in which his heroine Vera Pavlovna establishes a highly successful, democratically managed sewing cooperative workshop. This literary depiction transformed his cooperative vision into a vital guide for generations of Russian radicals.
//
Excerpt from the historian Vladan Vuklis’s interview for Osmatracnica podcast: “After the collapse of the Soviet Union and other real-socialist countries, the capitalist system reset itself to the relations more characteristic of XIX century then for thirties of XX century. International law that was necessary in the oscillations between two blocks was gradually neglected and abandoned. The spirit of Counter-Enlightenment, the direct regulation of relations between “Great Powers”, the totally open and brutal imperialism which was characteristic for XIX century, the conservatism as a type of all-pervasive ideological matrix in almost all societies and the oligarchic power with a façade of democracy.”
Recognizable in the rise of Counter-Enlightenment and conservatism that feed the complex phenomenon like “conspiracy theories” – popular narratives and “populism” – nationalist demagoguery.