§ 155.
JUZOV (Kablitz) attempted to provide a philosophic basis for the narodničestvo, not however with much success. He was a diligent translator of Spencer and the English empiricists (Bain and Mill), and he published detailed studies of the raskolniki, whom he considered to embody the genuine Russian essence. Juzov accepted Spencer's and Comte's emotionalism, and in his consideration of the national essence and of national character, he found these to subsist psychologically in the realm of feeling, in the dominance of emotion over understanding.
By his campaign against intellectualism he was led to take up a position adverse to the intelligentsia and to their endeavours on behalf of popular education. Drawing a sharp distinction between the nation and the state, he lapsed into a hazy apolitism, conceiving the mir and the artel to furnish sufficient support for the folk and for its economic activities in the domains of agriculture and home industry. Juzov's Principles of the Narodnicestvo (1882, etc.) thus inclined to the side of the reaction under Alexander III, and was opposed to the radical and revolutionary trend of the narodničestvo.[1]
The more critical adherents of the narodničestvo did not follow Juzov's lead, being inclined rather to accept the views of Lavrov, Černyševskii, and Mihailovskii. On the other hand, some of the narodniki were especially interested in the economic aspect of the problem. In deliberate opposition to Marx and the Marxists, they attempted to show that the economic and social evolution of Russia was quite peculiar, was distinct from and independent of that of Europe. Notable was the manner in which the teaching of the narodničestvo was likewise defended by the historians of literature.[2]
- ↑ Abramov, a talented writer of belles lettres, represented in his work the same trend as Juzov. During the middle eighties Šelgunov stigmatised "Abramovism" (Abramovščina) as a reactionary development of the narodničestvo.
- ↑ In this connection, mention should be made of Ivanov-Razumnik, author of a number of works bearing on the history of literature, wherein he defended the attitude of the narodničestvo as against Marxism. The most notable of these books were, A History of the Russian Social Spirit (1908), and The Meaning of Life (1910). But he insisted on the need for a "critical" narodničestvo, and accepted the experience philosophy, while basing his views upon Kant, especially in ethical matters "Russian socialism" and Marxism, he said, were not opposites, but Russian Marxism must certainly be contrasted with the narodni4estvo. K. Kačorovskii was another writer who discussed the theory and history of the mir (The Russian Village Community, 1900 et seq.)
