continued individual outrages because it had decided to devote itself exclusively to the preliminary work of revolutionising he masses.
It continued to exist, but seldom played any public part. (After Turgenev's death in 1883, the Narodnaja Volja issued a proclamation, and there were a few other manifestations of activity. During the revolutionary movement of 1905, it was reorganised as the Social Revolutionary Party.)
ix. Besides the terrorist Narodnaja Volja, there issued in 1879 from the Zemlja i Volja the party of the Černyi Pereděl (Black Redistribution, that is to say, redistribution or re-allotment of the black earth—see vol. I, p. 154). The aim of this party was to promote an agitation among the operatives and peasants. Plehanov, who was its leader in the theoretical field, strongly condemned the methods of the Narodnaja Volja.
The Černyi Peredél likewise declared itself representative of the narodničestvo, of the revolutionary section of that movement, seeing that its members considered that the solution of the agrarian problem was the very essence of the social question, and being guided in this view by the same reasons as those which influenced the narodovolcy. Socialism was declared to be the last word in sociology, and collectivism was considered to be the goal of the "radical reformer." This radicalism must be "economic" radicalism, meaning that the radical reformer must strive to the utmost to secure the betterment of economic conditions, since these constitute the real basis of all other social and political conditions (historical materialism). In 1879, Plehanov believed that collectivism could develop in Russia out of the mir and the artel, especially since capitalism was preparing agriculture, too, and landownership for socialisation—for in Russia as in Europe capitalism paved the way for socialism. Plehanov and his associates in the Černyi Pereděl believed that capitalism in Russia would concentrate landed proprietorship, and would therefore prepare conditions for the "black redistribution" essential to the mužik.
The Černyi Pereděl was likewise revolutionary, but its view of its mission differed from that of the narodovolcy. The members of the Černyi Pereděl considered that political revolutions had never secured economic freedom for the people, nor had even afforded anywhere guarantees for political freedom. Constitutions were exploited by the bourgeoisie against
