An event destined for general attention. Essay on the Decembrists. What are the people around you wearing?

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Similar Documents

    Definition of direct and figurative meanings of words in Russian. Scientific terms, proper names, recently emerged words, rarely used and words with a narrow subject meaning. Basic and derived lexical meanings of polysemantic words.

    presentation, added 04/05/2012

    Signs and specifics of the development of borrowed vocabulary. Anglo-American and French words in Russian. Social, psychological, aesthetic functions of foreign borrowings. Features of active and passive socio-political vocabulary.

    term paper, added 12/28/2011

    The uniqueness of the history of a foreign word in the receiving language. Signs of foreign inclusions in linguistic literature. The graphic form of the word. Distinguishing cases of homonymy and polysemy. General trends in the field of rooting of borrowed vocabulary.

    abstract, added 05/06/2011

    borrowed vocabulary. Reasons for intensive borrowing of English vocabulary in different periods. Modern views about the lexical meaning of the word, its semantic structure. General and different English borrowings in Russian.

    thesis, added 01/19/2009

    Lexical ellipticisms. Words formed with the help of suffixes that have the color of colloquialism. Truncated words. Portable values commonly used words. Traditional lexicographic classification of vocabulary.

    abstract, added 01/24/2007

    Description of the lexico-semantic class of time designations in Russian. Temporal lexemes in terms of morphology: nouns, adjectives, adverbs, numerals and phrases. Lexico-semantic meaning of the words of the category of time.

    term paper, added 01/14/2014

    Reasons for borrowing in the language and stages of mastering foreign vocabulary. Analysis of the composition of the vocabulary of commonly used words and their classification. Foreign neologisms, limited by the scope of their use. Development of the lesson "Borrowed words in Russian".

    thesis, added 08/18/2011

EVENT

EVENT

It has wide range both general and special interpretations: both natural (geological, physical, biological, ecological, cosmological, etc.); as S. historical; psychobiographical ("life"); world (catastrophes, wars, epidemics); as S. in the status of an incident or a case (eventfulness of everyday experience). In modern and latest philosophies. ontologies of the “organicist” (post-Bergsonian), phenomenological and post-structuralist “S.” (analogous to becoming) is opposed to the concept of being. The concept of "S." becomes necessary in connection with the introduction into human ideas about the procedural images of the world (universe), temporal duration, (A. Bergson) of this or that phenomenon, regardless of its content characteristics (material, physiological or spiritual-psychic). S. can be called any phenomenon that, being accomplished, cancels the previous principles of observation, i.e. individualized in its unique and inimitable essence. S. differs from the neutrality and passivity of the phenomenon, or: S. is a phenomenon that has acquired individual expression, even its own. In this sense, all scientific discoveries, receiving the names of scientists who first discovered them; how various natural phenomena and anomalies, historical epochs, and political S. are named. In carrying out, S. introduces changes in the area of ​​its own implementation and thereby changes the laws of observation.
S. can be both empty and filled: empty - this means that it is accomplished without the participation of an outside observer who would be capable of covering all stages of its accomplishment, S. is inaccessible and incomprehensible here, it is accomplished according to the divine plan; filled - then the moment came and happened, one thing became another, showed itself in a different guise and no longer exists. This kind of S. is available for observation. Moreover, S. is accomplished, because its accomplishments are expected, predicted, planned, its completion is “imposed”.
S. in post-Bergsonian natural philosophy (A.N. Whitehead, J. Deleuze). Influenced by the ideas of Whitehead's "metaphysics of nature," S. is understood as "the final unit of a natural phenomenon," as a natural process that, being structured (actualized), i.e. including certain meanings and, acquires its individual expression (""), given name. Without individualization, there is no S. The influence on Whitehead of the monadology of G. V. Leibniz and the pantheistic doctrine of B. Spinoza is obvious. S. - “alive”, continuously becoming in all manifestations (forms, elements and units, etc.). In this system of abstractions, there is no need to resort to "philosophies of consciousness", because the subject (perceiving the event) is abolished. Everything in nature, everything is eventful. There is no such phenomenon of reality that would not be event-based. S. interact and determine each other. A number of event-forming principles: structurality, since any S. is revealed only due to the invariable repetition of the content it covers; the principle of immanence, since every S. is immanent to another due to the introduced temporal principle, where the future is immanent to the present, and the present is immanent to the future due to its immanence to the completed states of the past; the principle of causal independence - the principle of immanence does not lead to an understanding of the unlimited interdetermination of all aspects of the universe, on the contrary, it is precisely because of the principle of causal independence that S. can be formed into individual complexes; to the extent that S. are immanent, they mutually limit each other; all innovations in the world and appear due to the causal independence of S.
Everyday indirectly indicates the absence of such a "hard" correlation between perceptual and eventful. The unperceived in and will be the focus of S. changing perception and to the very act of perception. The sphere of pre-findable perceptual meaning ceases to exist. In the act of perception, an interval of neutral time is formed, the effect of the discontinuity of the process of perception, because perception has its own, which is asynchronous to the time of the perceived, - where we do not perceive, they perceive us. And this empty time interval cannot be attributed either to the past, or to the future, or to the present, so the “between-time” S. “dead time” (Deleuze) appears. S. (b) occupies the time of the present, and it should be understood as an area that is saturated with eventful moments of the past and future. However, in fact, there is no present time as real time if it is occupied by S. Or otherwise: where S. exists, it manifests itself autonomously and in the fullness of (its) possible temporal and spatial content, however, separated from real time or other durations. S.'s time is not-time or "between-times". Every present is and is not-is: is - insofar as it is replaced as just being by the future moment; and is not - because it immediately turns into the past. In order to perceive S., we must stop the moment of the present at a certain point in time and create a process of spatialization of temporal duration, and then replace it with the ideal form of present time. And in this form, all other points of the future and the past should be laid down, but ideally, not actual. Not-time, which unfolds in time as duration, will be C.
The status of S. (Ereignis) in the fundamental ontology of M. Heidegger. The philosophizing of the late Heidegger develops under the sign of the study of S. as a fundamental existential. S. is already there. S. - "pure phenomenon, not correlated with any figure." Dr. in other words, it is not between two extreme terms, and it does not explain them in itself as in something higher. S. - not, it rather precedes, anticipates, opens up the possibility of being for everything that can happen, happen,. In any case, what Heidegger is trying to define as S. can be attributed to a duration outside of time and space, a duration in which it becomes what it is.
For Heidegger, S., in essence, represents some initial difference that precedes the appearance and unity of being, but this individualizes, singles out, and specializes what appears, i.e. a phenomenon is eventful in the sense in which it belongs to itself, is its own. Heidegger's Bergsonism is obvious.
An event in the metapsychology of Z. Freud. The specificity of Freud's approach is determined by the psychobiographical material that is the subject of psychoanalytic work. The biographed history of the patient's life is a collection of symptomatic signs indicating that a certain S. L "(traumatic) did not pass the stage of reacting in the experience and therefore continues to be accomplished. The task of the psychoanalyst is to decipher the symptomatic signs in time, a strictly causal explanation of the "history" biographical C. The concept of the initial scene (traumatic focus C) is introduced, which inevitably continues to be repeated in the patient's dreams, dreams, fears, fantasies and actions. Psychobiographically, C. manifests itself as a repetition of the same scene. "history", i.e. cannot cope with the causal relationship of all his symptomatic dependencies, then the psychoanalyst must help the patient find his logically consistent "life story". Critics of psychoanalysis often say that the psychoanalyst invents C. and does not really reconstruct them To which Freud replied: no matter what S. is invented, it is important that the patient accepts his "version". S. manifests itself as a repetition. Thus, repetition indicates the causal relationships of symptomatic nodes ("scenes").
S. is interpreted in Freud's metapsychology as a case: what happened to the patient, and what remains the focus of his internal stress, the reason for mental regression, must be eliminated. Genuine healthy eventless. S. - always, external, random, something that invades, that poses a threat, etc. Psychic life always needs an additional amount of energy, which would make it possible to translate the plan of the case into the plan C. and thereby eliminate its traumatic sources.
S. in the historical sciences. Discussions in the 1960s and 1970s in modern historical science about the significance of the role of S. led historians (primarily from the “Annals school”: F., L. Febvre, M. Blok, E. Leroy-Ledurie, M. Foucault) to abandon the so-called. event history. If S. is understood only in a short historical perspective, then this means imposing on him the external laws of duration, placing in just as short, but different and, very likely, alien to him time perspectives and thereby increasing the element of his historical contingency, incompleteness, distortion. The role of the observer-historian becomes extremely significant in the selection of versions and the causation of one or another S. Hence the research dissatisfaction and the subsequent to this type of historical research that involves other ideas about historical duration: for example, “great duration”, histoire de la longue duree, or as "immovable history". The historian should “get used to time flowing slowly, so slowly that it would seem almost motionless”, and then: “... all explosions of historical time will appear growing from this semi-stationary depth, the center of attraction around which everything revolves” (F. Braudel). S. is endowed with time, containing all the necessary content-material formations, which ultimately led to a “sudden” transformation of the historical process.
S. in the semiotic interpretation of culture (Yu. Lotman). S. receives a structural-sign interpretation: temporal duration, S. its uniqueness, uniqueness (“eternal” qualities) are not accepted in, which is due to the general task of semiotic text analysis, which implies the superiority of synchronistic methods of description over diachronic ones. The presence of S. in textual reality is recognized on the basis of the deployment of a chain of "random" S. in plot structure. “An event in the text is the movement of a character across the border of the semantic field” (Yu. Lotman). And this means that S. is taken as a sharp and unexpected displacement of the semantic field, which has no other duration than that contained in the very fact that the self is also displaced. S. is recognized here not from the point of view. observer, and from v.sp. text: what is eventful for the text is not necessarily eventful for the observer (reader).

Philosophy: Encyclopedic Dictionary. - M.: Gardariki. Edited by A.A. Ivina. 2004 .

EVENT

coexistence; according to Heidegger, being together with others; “since everything exists in the world (Being-world), it is always the world that I share with others. The world of existence is a co-world. (M. Heidegger. Sein und Zeit, 1949); cm. General concern.

Philosophical Encyclopedic Dictionary. 2010 .

EVENT

EVENT - a concept that has a wide range of interpretations: as a natural phenomenon (geological, physical, biological, ecological, cosmological, etc.); as a historical event; as a psycho-biographical event (“history of life”), a world event (catastrophes, wars, epidemics); as an event in the status of an incident or a case (the eventfulness of everyday experience). In modern and newest philosophical ontologies of the “organicist” (post-Bergsonian), phenomenological and post-structuralist sense, the concept of an event (analogous to becoming) is opposed to the concept of being. The concept of an event becomes necessary in connection with the introduction into human experience of the idea of ​​the procedural images of the world (universe), the temporal duration (A. Bergson) of this or that phenomenon. An event - but not co-existence (not an accompaniment of being). An event can be called any phenomenon that, when it happens, is individualized in its unique and inimitable essence and even acquires its own name. In this sense, all scientific discoveries (physical effects, experiments or laws) are endowed with an event form, receiving the names of the scientists who first discovered them, just as various natural phenomena and anomalies, historical epochs and political events are named. The event, when it occurs, cancels the previous observations (otherwise the event would be described and studied as a recurring phenomenon, that is, in the system of the previous possibilities of observation).

Each event is an event multiplicity and takes place outside of us as witnesses-observers, but through us and by us as perceivers. Understanding the nature of an event depends primarily on where the witnesses-observers are located. The first is the same witness-observer for a set (stream) of events, fully included in the experienced event. The second class is witness-observers for the same event. The excess power of the event is resolved in an unlimited number of versions, each of which is “true” but not complementary to . An event realizes itself (actualizes) in a variety of interpretations, none of which gains superiority over the other. The event continues and is unable to end as long as this “swarming” of interpretations continues. Any individual, evidence, interpretation, horizon, perspective are part of the modality of the event and determine its accomplishments.

In the structure of an event, one part is an event-plan, or a pure event, the incomprehensibility of accomplishment, “unobservability”; everything becomes, but does not happen. The other part is the ongoing eventfulness of the event. At any of the moments of perception, we rush through the accomplished event to its unaccomplished basis: we incarnate in the event, become actualized. Observation presupposes a detachment from the observed, it makes it possible for that which is detached to acquire an individual. The part does not just become a whole or “embracing”, it is transformed into an individual entity in which the (value) of the event is revealed. “The real world is a variety of prehensions, and the 'grasping' (prehensio) itself is the 'embracing event'. The enveloping event is the most concrete entity, understood as it is in and for itself, and not in terms of its aspects contained in the nature of another similar event” (Whitehead). Observation is made up of these two acts of detachment-envelopment: detaching grasping or enveloping detachment, the result of which will be the embodiment of the event or it (which passes through the observer).

AN EVENT IN POST-BERGSONIAN “NATURAL PHILOSOPHY” (A. N. Whitehead, J. Deleuze). Under the influence of the ideas of Whitehead's "metaphysics of nature", a tradition is developing to understand the event as the "final unit of a natural phenomenon", as a "living organism", continuously becoming in all manifestations (forms, elements, units, etc.). The function of the subject perceiving the event is abolished. Everything in nature is a process, everything is eventful. Events interact and determine each other. The principles that form the event: structural (any event is revealed only due to the invariable repetition of the content it covers); immanence (every event is immanent to another: the future is immanent to the present, and the present to the future due to its immanence to the completed states of the past); causal, due to which events can be formed into individual complexes.

Due to the absence of a “hard” correlation between the perceptual and the eventual, an interval of neutral time is formed in the act of perception, the effect of the discontinuity of the process of perception, because perception has its own time, which is asynchronous to the time of the perceived; this is how an empty time interval “between-times” of an event, “dead time” (Deleuze) appears. The time of the event is non-time or “between-time”. Every moment of the present is and is not: is - insofar as it is replaced as just a former moment by a future moment; and is not - because it immediately turns into the past. In order to perceive an event, we must stop the moment of the present at a certain point in time and create the possibility of the process of spatialization of temporal duration, then replace it with the ideal form of present time. And in this form, all other points of the future and the past should be laid, but ideally, not actual. Non-time, which unfolds in time as a duration, will be an event.

Language expresses this duration in a completely impersonal way: infinitives express the incompleteness of an action that comes true without coming true and lasts in a different horizon of time. Getting “inside” an event that is extremely external to it, it becomes different (the transition from the “perceiving” to the “perceived”), i.e., an event-for-itself: this moment of becoming is the event itself.

EVENT (EREIGNIS) IN M. HEIDEGGER'S FUNDAMENTAL ONTOLOGY (event as ). The event is already there (il a, es gibt). The event is duration, “a pure phenomenon, not related to any agent”, what Heidegger tries to define as an event can be attributed to duration outside of time and space, duration in which being becomes what it is. The event precedes, precedes, opens up the possibilities of being for everything that can happen, happen, become. The event (Ereignis) "specializes" everything that acquires the existential, gives everything that appears its own essence, unique and unique: the phenomenon is eventful in the sense in which it belongs to itself.

EVENT IN METAPSYCHOLOGY 3. FREUD. The patient's life history is considered by Freud as a set of symptomatic signs indicating that a certain traumatic event has not passed the stage of reaction in the experience and therefore continues to happen. The concept of the initial scene (traumatic focus of the event) is introduced, which continues to be repeated in dreams, dreams, fears, fantasies and actions of the patient. The event psychobiographically manifests itself as a repetition of the same scene, and the psychoanalyst must help the patient decipher the symptomatic signs and find his logically consistent “life story”. Critics of psychoanalysis often say that the psychoanalyst invents events rather than actually reconstructing them. To which Freud replied; it doesn't matter which event is invented, what matters is that the "version" of it is accepted by the patient. Procedures of psychoanalytic technique: correlation of the event! with his experience (listening to the “story” that the patient tells); correlating the event not with its experience, on which the patient insists, but with its own biographical content (identifying the initial scene and the subsequent sequence of scenes); revealing the true motives of the patient, which must be correlated with the real story. The event is interpreted in Freud's metal psychology as a case: that which became the reason for mental regression must be eliminated, a genuine healthy life is eventless.

THE EVENT IN THE HISTORICAL SCIENCES The discussions of the 1960s and 70s about the significance of the role of the event led a number of historians (primarily from the “Annals school”: F. Braudel, L. Febvre, M. Blok, E. Leroy-Ledurie, M. Foucault) to refuse from the so-called. event history". The role of the observer-historian becomes extremely significant in the selection of versions and the causation of this or that “event”. The event is endowed with time, containing all the necessary content-material conditions for its formation, which ultimately led to the “sudden” transformation of the historical process. The historian should “get used to time flowing slowly, so slowly that it would seem almost motionless”, and then: “... all explosions of historical time will appear growing out of this semi-stationary depth, the center of attraction around which everything revolves” (F. Braudel) An event is described simultaneously in several orders of time in the short term of the present (“now”), in retrospection of its past history (“yesterday”) and, finally, in the pre-event optics of the original past (“once”). “rare event” in geology or the original, generating events in the history of life (in psychoanalysis): in the first case, the event is defined in relative brevity in relation to the geological age of the Earth, in the second, in relation to the possible number of psychoanalytic sessions on the basis of which history is restored painful symptoms.

EVENT IN THE SEMIOTIC INTERPRETATION OF THE TEXT (Yu. Lotman). The presence of an event in a textual reality is recognized on the basis of the unfolding of the Chain of “random” events into a plot structure. “An event in the text is the movement of a character across the boundary of the semantic field” (Lotman), i.e., the event is taken as a sharp and unexpected displacement of the semantic field. What is eventful for the text is not necessarily eventful for the observer (reader). The event is stratified into two forms: unpredictability (randomness) and predictability (necessity, expectation of repetition). The form of any phenomenon is eventful if it expresses itself through unpredictability, an event is eventful in the randomness of manifestation. Lotman develops the idea of ​​the explosive nature of event time: every time an event presents itself to the observer, it entails explosive changes that renew and transform the system in which it manifested itself. Novelty,

"to be together in misfortune or joy, until death do us part," says university doctor Washington State, John Gottman.

In his article "Why Marriage Is Successful or Failed", the expert calls these four factors "the four knights of the Apocalypse". The road to divorce is made up of defensiveness, criticism, emotional blocking and contempt, says Dr. Gottman. He devoted decades to the study of relationships, marriage and divorce. "They predict divorce prematurely, on average within 5.6 years of marriage."

Four "knights of the Apocalypse" before the divorce:

Criticism . Lively and frank discussions about problems married couple have their advantages. Florida State University experts said that family disputes can signal unacceptable partner behaviors. Thus, quarrels can lead to a change in relationships for the better. But such an effect is achieved when these discussions are directed at both partners, and not at one of them. "You're always talking about yourself. You're so selfish(a)" is an example of criticism that chills and hurts relationships, says Dr. Gottman.

defensive position. Phrases such as "It's not my fault, but yours" are extremely dangerous for the harmony of a relationship in a couple. Making excuses or shifting responsibility for negative events keeps us from obeying our partner's wishes, says personal development consultant Ordell Kemp. As a result, our "self-defense" attitude reveals our guilt and that we are wrong. And at the same time, this approach only fuels the rage of the partner, since you do not have the right to assert what worries both.

Emotional blocking. This behavior leads to a lack of emotional engagement with your partner. "When fights happen regularly, it's easier to break up a marriage rather than get involved in problem solving. Emotional blocking is a very dangerous trait because it causes you to abandon your partner and leave unresolved issues," says Kemp.

Contempt. "This is the most important symptom of divorce and must be addressed," said Dr. Gottman. Such behavior, in contrast to respect for a partner, often degenerates into verbal violence, insults and hostile relations. There are four ways to express contempt, writes Professor Ni Preston, in an article for Psychology Today. There is a limit to negative behavior that can change the overall meaning. For example, instead of a hostile phrase after some mistake by a partner ("You did what I asked, but it's no good"), you can use a constructive change that can be useful ("I noticed that you did what I requested, but could you fix it").

Another method is used for phrases that begin with "you" and usually convey accusations or instructions. Such statements can lead to conflict: "You must understand", "You are not good enough." Generalizing phrases are added to them: “Never do…” “You are always wrong…” “We all know that you…” Contempt and ignorance are obvious, even if you just use these phrases, stresses Professor Ni This category also includes words such as "Who cares what you feel", "you've gone too far", "care/feelings/your words mean nothing to me".

Marriage Saving Method

The four factors that degrade and destroy a marriage can be combined into other elements that destroy a romantic relationship. Some of them: mutual termination of relations, lack of compromise, unresolved conflicts, delusions.

There is no universal recipe yet that will guarantee that you will live "happily ever after" with the person with whom you have united your destiny. But there are some "ingredients" that strengthen the bond between partners. One of them is how partners feel about their relationship and love. If both partners choose to give without expecting or demanding anything in return, then the chances of success in such a relationship are greatly increased, says Adam Grant, author of Give and Receive: A Revolutionary Approach to Success.

Numerous studies aimed at finding harmony in a couple have shown the importance of focusing on positive developments in a relationship. Experienced partners expect a lot from relationships and understand that each of them is responsible for only part of the overall happiness, and the rest depends on both.

The Decembrist movement is a phenomenon of the social and political life of Russia in the first quarter of the 19th century. This phenomenon is directly related to the beginning freedom movement in Russia. The freedom movement is a phenomenon public life Russia in the entire nineteenth century and the beginning of the twentieth century up to October revolution. V.I. Lenin called the Decembrist uprising the forerunner of October. Thus, the history of the liberation movement in Russia began precisely with the Decembrists.
Each era has its own characteristics that distinguish it from other eras. The beginning of the 19th century, both for Europe and Russia, is characterized by a series of revolutionary movements associated with educational ideas, with the idea of ​​overthrowing autocracy and establishing a monarchy, dividing powers into three parts - legislative, executive and judicial, for the implementation of natural human rights, for establishing democracy. IN Russian Empire the economic question was acute - the question of the abolition of serfdom, in contrast to the Western European countries, where the capitalist system already dominated. Serfdom was a sore point in the life of Russian society. It was the reason for the economic backwardness of Russia from neighboring countries. Most sober politicians of that time, for example, M. Speransky, made attempts to eliminate serfdom. Emperor Alexander also in the first, liberal, period of his reign made attempts to eliminate or weaken serfdom. But all these attempts "from above" to carry out such important reforms have failed.
The Decembrist movement is the first attempt to transform Russia "from below". But they did not solve the main tasks, especially since not all Decembrists were of the same opinion about these tasks.
What common tasks were inherent in all the Decembrists? This, of course, is the elimination of serfdom, as well as, to one degree or another, the weakening of the autocracy.
But there were moments on which there was no consensus. What form of government should be in Russia - a republic or a constitutional monarchy? What to do with the emperor - execute him alone or with his family, or simply limit his power by the constitution, or give him no power, but not take his life? Should Russia be a federal or unitary country? How to make the division of power into legislative, executive and judicial? What rights should be given to citizens? There was no unity in the most important socio-economic issue - with the abolition of serfdom, to allocate land to the peasants or not; to deprive the landlords and the church of land ownership or not? These disagreements were visible from the provisions of the main policy documents of the Decembrists - "Russian Truth" by P.I. Pestel and "Constitution" by N.M. Muravyov.
Why did the Decembrist uprising take place precisely in mid-December 1825? The fact is that this time was the most suitable for such decisive action. Emperor Alexander 1 died on November 19, 1825. The period from November 19 to December 14, 1825 is the period of interregnum. During this period, there were disputes - who will be the next emperor? The fact is that Constantine should be the emperor, but he refused the throne. Nicholas has not yet signed the Manifesto on his accession to the throne. Thus, this time was very convenient for the uprising.
However, different researchers have different opinions about the nature of the uprising - was it an accident or did it have to happen sooner or later? I believe that it was natural and would have happened sooner or later. But the period of interregnum was a kind of shturshka or reason to act for the Decembrists.
Without dwelling on the detailed events, I will only talk about the main events of the uprising. On the morning of December 14, Nikolai Pavlovich appointed the oath (he decided to become emperor due to the fact that he learned about the impending uprising). The uprising began on the morning of December 14 in St. Petersburg. The leader of the uprising was S.P. Trubetskoy. The arrest of the royal family, the capture of the Peter and Paul Fortress and Senate Square, as well as the proclamation of the manifesto were planned. In the middle of the day, Trubetskoy saw that the uprising plan was frustrated and did not appear on the square. The rebels chose E.P. Obolensky as their leader. Before evening approached, Nicholas ordered to shoot at the rebels and the uprising was crushed.
Was the uprising doomed to failure from the start? What are the reasons for the defeat of the uprising?
Among the reasons for the uprising are the following. First, there was no clearly thought-out program for the uprising. The rebels pursued different goals of their actions. There was no unity in the ideology of the rebels. Secondly, the leader of the uprising, Trubetskoy, realized that the uprising was doomed to failure, and did not take any action. The rebels were confused and did not have a clear plan of their actions. Thirdly, the Decembrists did not have the support of the people and did not seek to find it. Finally, the defeat was influenced by the fact that the emperor, before evening, began the massacre of the rebels. If he had not taken these actions, it would have been possible for events to turn in favor of the uprising: in the darkness, military personnel could go over to the side of the rebels and thereby replenish their forces. But this did not happen.
The uprising was severely punished. 5 people were sentenced to quartering, replaced by hanging. During the execution of the sentence, three of the five condemned fell out of the noose. According to the laws, they should have been pardoned, but they were treated cruelly: they were returned to their former position and hanged. Many were punished with eternal exile. In 1856, Emperor Alexander 11 declared an amnesty for the surviving Decembrists. Some of them still lived to achieve their goal - the abolition of serfdom. But not from below, but from above.
Can the Decembrist uprising be called a Russian revolt? I think it's partly possible. Because in the history of the movement against the authorities, along with the uprising of Pugachev, Bolotnikov, this is a general protest. At the same time, the Decembrist uprising is a special page, it is a new quality of resistance.

Reviews

Let me disagree with you. First, you should pay attention to the fact that the "progressive" Decembrist movement acted by the traditional method tested in previous reigns palace coup. Secondly, the abolition of serfdom (which Pavel began to restrict) - if the "virtually" allowed the victory of the Decembrists, most likely, would remain a slogan, since no one in Russia had any idea how to implement it. Suffice it to recall how the thoughtful and carefully prepared reform of 1861 shook the country ... And finally, the performance of the Decembrists can be called a "Russian rebellion" with great exaggeration: the consequences of the reforms of Peter 1, which split the people into two unequal parts, by 1825 made themselves felt in full measure: the gulf between the people and the privileged classes became insurmountable.
Regards, Mikhail.

Date of: 1998-02-05

3 round

Date of: 1998-02-26

Question 6: What does it take in India to master the acupuncture system and successfully treat at least one hundred patients with asthma and headaches?

Question 7: A book dedicated to this, published in St. Petersburg in 1897, says that the public looks at the man who owns it "as an exceptional phenomenon that does not have a certain position in society and is not recognized by it," but at the woman who owns it " almost with the feeling with which they would look at a Turkish prisoner impaled." However, the opinion of the townsfolk did not prevent Count Leo Tolstoy from becoming the honorary president of the Russian club of fans of this. What is it?

Question 8: At the end of the 19th century, the French scientist Gaston Mospero brought some priceless relic to France. During the inspection in the port of Marseilles, the customs officer, having examined that THIS and not finding anything like it in the directory of customs tariffs, rated IT at the highest tariff - the tariff dried fish. What was IT?

Question 10: Pylyaev, a connoisseur of Moscow antiquity, cites several amusing signs that flaunted in Moscow in the middle of the 19th century. For example: "Sale of various torments", "Pianist and royalist". Finish the inscription on the handicraft workshop "Copper, aka..."

4 round

Date of: 1998-03-05

Question 1: This resident of one of the European capitals did not recognize traditional medicine at all. He protected his health only with the help of superdoses of carbohydrates, glucose and sucrose. Name his favorite phrase calling for restraint of emotions.

Question 2: It was at the end of the last century. England actively interfered, France no less actively helped, and Verdi wrote an opera. What have they built?

Question 4: This phrase of V.I. Lenin begins with the words: "In the conditions of illiteracy of the population ..." And how does it end?

Answer:"... the most important of the arts for us is cinema"

A comment:
z-checkdb: By opening complete collection works of V.I. Lenin, it is easy to see that his phrase looks like this: "You must firmly remember that of all the arts, cinema is the most important for us"; illiteracy is not mentioned, it's just a popular misconception, see https://liveuser.livejournal.com/62878.html (Anatoly Averbakh).

Similar posts