Стачечные выступления рабочих в Сибири в начале нового революционного подъема (июнь 1910 апрель 1912 г. )
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article points out that of all the diversity of labour movement strike was the most specific proletarian form of struggle. Growth of strike struggle of the Russian proletariat in the second half of 1910 was the main indicator of the beginning of a new labour movement rise in the country after a three-year period of the political reaction from 1907 to the first half of 1910. Revival of the workers' class activity in Russia in the second half of 1920 did not mean deep quantity and quality changes in the strike struggle. In the mentioned year out of 78 thousand strikers only 6 thousand ones took part in political strikes, the rest took part in economic turns. As in the years of reaction, strikes bore mainly self-defensive character, where most of them ended up in defeat. So, labour movement rise in 1910 came very slowly. Especially it referred in the early months of the rise to workers from the remote places, in particular, from Siberia. Strike movement here revealed the tendency to its growth only in 1911 when its scale and structure changed significantly. Thus, in 1911in Siberia there took place 63 strikes with approximately 7377 workers participating, whereas the year before there were 52 strikes with 3800 workers participating. In the first quarter of 1912 (before shooting of workers in Lenskygold-mines) workers' struggle continued to grow. From January to April this year Siberian workers held 62 strikes in which participated around 6900 people. Unlike the central regions of the country, in Siberia the revival of the proletarian struggle in the early years of the rise was not followed by political turns of the local workers. Only at the beginning of 1912 here was seen the increase of strikes with mixed demands. Alongside with that strikes gained offensive character more and more. However, offensive turns became clearly dominant in Siberia only in the first quarter of 1912, whereas in the central provinces it happened since the early 1911. Quantitative growth of strikes in Siberia in 1911 the early 1912, the increase of offensive and successful strikes were closely connected with changes in the participants body of the strike struggle in the period under review. If in 1910 in strike movement there dominated builders, with miners following up, in 1911 the early 1912 the situation changed significantly. Miners were considerably ahead builders in the degree of participation in the movement. Alongside with them during that period workers of processing industry began to participate in strikes more actively. In 1911, in particular, they held 19 strikes (i.e. 2.4 times more than in 1910). The development of strike movement in Siberia during the first years of the rise became quite a significant factor in the social life of the region. Together with the rise of the labour movement the social-democratic underground activated, which manifested in in its attempts to become a leading element in the strikes. In 1911-1912 social democrats led strikes in the main workshops in Chita (January, 1911), at the shipyard of the Kushnarevs' trading house in Verholensk district of the Irkutsk province (January 1911), at Bekkera's brickyard in Krasnoyarsk (June 1911), in Lensk gold-mine (the early 1912). However, many turns in the early years of the period under review took place without the influence and leadership of social democrats. Thus, the analysis of the strike movement in Siberia at the beginning of the new revolutionary rise (June 1910 the early 1912) let us say that like in other regions of the country it did not spread broadly and grew gradually after hard years of political reaction. However, the tendency of the rise was significant in Siberian margin as well. The number of strikes and number of its participants grew, and qualitative changes were observed in strike movement. It became especially apparent at a later stage of the struggle from 1912 to 1914.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.025 | 0.039 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it