115,783 research outputs found

    The Bolshevik Party Transformed: Stalin’s Rise to Power (1917–1927)

    Full text link
    The article was submitted on 17.01.2017.In 1917, the Bolsheviks promised the liberation of the working masses from exploitation. And yet, within twenty years, they had delivered a regime that was substantially more exploitative and repressive than that of the Tsarist regime they had overthrown. This article argues that more than a quarter of a century after the opening of the archives, we still misapprehend how it happened. Historians tend to see the process as programmatic, or planned and intentional: that the Bolsheviks were authoritarian by nature, or that Stalin hijacked the Revolution and satisfied his lust for power by building a personal dictatorship. The article argues that we have failed to grasp the extent to which the positive programme of liberation continued to motivate the Bolshevik leadership throughout the interwar period. But they had underestimated the obstacles to creating a consensual, participatory political order. Considerable progress was made overcoming basic illiteracy, but it was another matter altogether to establish a functioning administrative apparatus, to fight and win the civil war, and to rebuild a shattered economy. The breakdown of liberal (“bourgeois”) democracies in Europe encouraged complacency about the superiority of the “transitional” proletarian dictatorship. The struggle for power after Lenin’s death turned local organisations against inner party democracy. It did not seem appropriate to revive it either in the midst of collectivisation and rapid industrialisation. The survival of the Revolution and catching up to the advanced capitalist countries took precedence. But if we treat extreme political violence and dictatorship as ends in themselves, we will fail adequately to grasp the fate of the Revolution.В 1917 г. большевики обещали освобождение трудящихся масс от эксплуатации. Но в течение 20 лет они установили режим гораздо более эксплуататорский и репрессивный по своей сути, чем побежденный ими царизм. Автор утверждает, что спустя более четверти века после открытия архивов мы все еще остаемся в неведении по поводу того, почему так случилось. Историки склонны рассматривать этот исход как запрограммированный либо преднамеренно спланированный, поскольку большевики были авторитарны по своей природе, или же Сталин «оседлал» революцию и установил личную диктатуру, удовлетворяя жажду власти. До сих пор нет ясности в понимании того, в какой степени положительная программа освобождения народа продолжала мотивировать большевистское руководство в межвоенный период. Большевики недооценили препятствия на пути создания общественного порядка, основанного на согласованном политическом участии. Существенный прогресс был достигнут на пути ликвидации неграмотности, но значительно труднее было создать функционирующий государственный аппарат, бороться и выиграть Гражданскую войну, а также восстановить разрушенную экономику. Падение либеральных («буржуазных») демократий в Европе укрепляло ощущение превосходства «переходной» пролетарской диктатуры. Борьба за власть после смерти Ленина направила местные партийные организации на борьбу с внутрипартийной демократией. Возрождать ее в условиях коллективизации и ускоренной индустриализации казалось неуместным. Гораздо более важным представлялось выживание революции и стремление догнать передовые капиталистические страны. Автор отмечает, что если относиться к проявлениям политического насилия и диктатуре как к конечной цели советской власти, невозможно должным образом понять судьбу революции

    The Halifax and Lancaster in Canadian Service

    Get PDF

    Requirements dilemma

    Get PDF
    This thesis was submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy and awarded by Brunel University.Knowing ‘what’ to build is an integral part of an Information System Development, and it is generally understood that this, which is known as Requirements, is achievable through a process of understanding, communication and management. It is currently maintained by the Requirements theorists that successful system design clarifies the interrelations between information and its representations. However, this belief can be shown to be based on flawed assumptions, as there are persistent reports of failures, indicating that there is a gap between the theory and the practice, and that this gap needs to be bridged. A year long in-depth case study of a project group, starting with their strategy announcement and ending with the commissioning system hand-over meeting, followed the group in their ‘doing’ of the Requirements. These mundane meetings were recorded and transcribed, forming a detailed data set of ‘what-is-done’ and ‘how-it-is-done’. The developed research approach adhesively maintained the practical situation, aiming to investigate and make sense of the here-and-now actions of the scoping and defining processes that were at work. The results of the investigation led the researcher to question previous beliefs and assumptions in Requirements, because of ambiguities that were uncovered, also because there was no sufficiently distinct process found that could assuredly be labelled as Requirements. This phenomenon evoked further questioning of “how strange?”, which triggered the testing of the validity of the Requirements theory. The second stage adapted an analysis framework on decision-making in order to reveal a causal connection between the actions found in the ‘doing’ and in the stocks of knowledge that form the Requirements theory. This phase analysed the operationalization of the theory to examine its commensurate, incommensurate and defective activities. The analysis revealed the existence of other dominant processes that affect the Requirements theory, leaving it underdetermined, with no true causal connections that can be established. This led to the inevitable conclusion that the current Information Systems thinking on Requirements is on the horns of a dilemma without any prospective resolution, because of the elliptical misalignment between the theoretical and the empirical worlds.EPSRC research grant number 00302238 partly funded this wor

    A new approach for estimating northern peatland gross primary productivity using a satellite-sensor-derived chlorophyll index

    No full text
    Carbon flux models that are largely driven by remotely sensed data can be used to estimate gross primary productivity (GPP) over large areas, but despite the importance of peatland ecosystems in the global carbon cycle, relatively little attention has been given to determining their success in these ecosystems. This paper is the first to explore the potential of chlorophyll-based vegetation index models for estimating peatland GPP from satellite data. Using several years of carbon flux data from contrasting peatlands, we explored the relationships between the MERIS terrestrial chlorophyll index (MTCI) and GPP, and determined whether the inclusion of environmental variables such as PAR and temperature, thought to be important determinants of peatland carbon flux, improved upon direct relationships. To place our results in context, we compared the newly developed GPP models with the MODIS (Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectrometer) GPP product. Our results show that simple MTCI-based models can be used for estimates of interannual and intra-annual variability in peatland GPP. The MTCI is a good indicator of GPP and compares favorably with more complex products derived from the MODIS sensor on a site-specific basis. The incorporation of MTCI into a light use efficiency type model, by means of partitioning the fraction of photosynthetic material within a plant canopy, shows most promise for peatland GPP estimation, outperforming all other models. Our results demonstrate that satellite data specifically related to vegetation chlorophyll content may ultimately facilitate improved quantification of peatland carbon flux dynamics