This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Daily page views
|
"although some Left SRs did become part of the government"
The Left SR party was a coalition partner in the Soviet Government. Will change this to;
"The Left SR party became the coalition partner of the Bolsheviks in the Soviet Government,"
Any objections? TheInquisitor 00:50, 3rd Oct 2005
Also removed the bit about Victor Chernov being a Left SR and member of Soviet Government. He was actually Right SR and member of Provisional Government.
It also seems like the statement about SRs joining the Whites is overstated. Even the anti-communist historian Richard Pipes concedes that "The White Movement" was extremely reactionary in character representing the most privileged and feudal oriented sections of society and that it was steeped in anti-semitism. Thus they were considered in essence partisans of restoration of the monarchy and the old order and were loathed by all progressives and radicals who viewed the Reds as the lesser evil. This concern became more pronounced after the "Kolchak Coup" of 1919 in which Admiral Kolchak arrested-and executed some-of the SR and liberal members of the White Government. Things got so bad that Kerensky went to so far as to approach President Wilson and ask that he not aid the Whites, as he saw the Reds as an unstable and fleeting phenomenon, with the prospect of the resotoration of autocracy being more ominous. The peasants, some of whom had been born in serfdom and who were the social base of the SRs, had little use for their ancient oppressors whom they had a jaundiced view of. In this vein when the Bolshevik traitor Grigorev approached Makhno, the Ukrainian "anarchist" leader of the Ukrainian Army of Insurgent Peasants, who were on and off allies then enemies of the Soviet Government, about forming an alliance against the Bolsheviks, Makhno had him summarily executed, denouncing Grigorev as a scab and a class traitor. It is not an exagerration at all to characterize the Whites as proto-fascist given the loud praise Hitler heaped on them early in his career (actually in 1919-20 the "Freikorps" that Hitler was a member of at the time and who boasted about their recent murder of Leibnecht and Luxemburg and the suppression of the German Revolution, played a role in the Russian Civil War in the area around Kaliningrad where German troops had remained and ethnic German elements existed) and what happened in Russia twenty five years later. Tom Cod 22:32, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
Image:1904-kamf.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. BetacommandBot 07:42, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
The correct title for the article would be: "Party of Socialists-Revolutionaries", which is an accurate translation from Russian. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Winnie ru ( talk • contribs) 03:26, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: page moved. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 18:51, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
The page was recently moved from the proposed title, and then the title subsequently finessed for punctuation, on the basis of it being a more direct translation of the Russian name (there was no RM or even informal discussion). However, the proposed/original form is clearly the standard rendering in the vast majority of book references, by some way (see section above), which is what we should go by. These often differ for political organisations, especially when it comes to the simple ordering of the words, eg with
NATO (when compared to the French version),
PSOE (from the original Spanish). See also, for example,
Britannica,
Merriam-Webster and what
appears to be one of their own publications etc for what is the preferred form. I would simply move it back myself but a) thought it worth doing formally as it was only recently moved away; and b) the proposed title is currently a redirect to this one and that redirect needs deleting.
N-HH
talk/
edits 10:13, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
ps: here are the Google Book links for ease of reference: "Party of Socialists-Revolutionaries" -
265 ... "Socialist Revolutionary Party" +Russia -
32,500. There'll obviously be quite a few false positives in the latter, but scrolling through the first few pages of results suggests you need to go some way in before they start kicking in (they seem to start on about the third page for the former).
N-HH
talk/
edits 10:50, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
This has been deleted from the article twice. Why? Kaplan was an SR, so it seems relevant.
Ghostofnemo ( talk) 05:00, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
How could its ideology have been "revolutionary socialism of democratic socialist and agrarian socialist forms"? These are three separate ideologies, and first being inconsistent with the second (i.e revolutionary and democratic). 203.80.61.102 ( talk) 20:51, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
The lede is about four times longer than it should be, in proportion to the article. Valetude ( talk) 06:44, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
Wikipedia is riddled with anachronical mentions of "democratic socialism". This is the left-wing equivalent of labelling pro-capitalist parties as libertarian - the application of a novel nomenclature to historical persons or groups that, even though they may have understood the general thrust of the term, would not associate it with its current understanding (and the way that it is described in the corresponding wikipedia article). 82.12.128.242 ( talk) 22:10, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Daily page views
|
"although some Left SRs did become part of the government"
The Left SR party was a coalition partner in the Soviet Government. Will change this to;
"The Left SR party became the coalition partner of the Bolsheviks in the Soviet Government,"
Any objections? TheInquisitor 00:50, 3rd Oct 2005
Also removed the bit about Victor Chernov being a Left SR and member of Soviet Government. He was actually Right SR and member of Provisional Government.
It also seems like the statement about SRs joining the Whites is overstated. Even the anti-communist historian Richard Pipes concedes that "The White Movement" was extremely reactionary in character representing the most privileged and feudal oriented sections of society and that it was steeped in anti-semitism. Thus they were considered in essence partisans of restoration of the monarchy and the old order and were loathed by all progressives and radicals who viewed the Reds as the lesser evil. This concern became more pronounced after the "Kolchak Coup" of 1919 in which Admiral Kolchak arrested-and executed some-of the SR and liberal members of the White Government. Things got so bad that Kerensky went to so far as to approach President Wilson and ask that he not aid the Whites, as he saw the Reds as an unstable and fleeting phenomenon, with the prospect of the resotoration of autocracy being more ominous. The peasants, some of whom had been born in serfdom and who were the social base of the SRs, had little use for their ancient oppressors whom they had a jaundiced view of. In this vein when the Bolshevik traitor Grigorev approached Makhno, the Ukrainian "anarchist" leader of the Ukrainian Army of Insurgent Peasants, who were on and off allies then enemies of the Soviet Government, about forming an alliance against the Bolsheviks, Makhno had him summarily executed, denouncing Grigorev as a scab and a class traitor. It is not an exagerration at all to characterize the Whites as proto-fascist given the loud praise Hitler heaped on them early in his career (actually in 1919-20 the "Freikorps" that Hitler was a member of at the time and who boasted about their recent murder of Leibnecht and Luxemburg and the suppression of the German Revolution, played a role in the Russian Civil War in the area around Kaliningrad where German troops had remained and ethnic German elements existed) and what happened in Russia twenty five years later. Tom Cod 22:32, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
Image:1904-kamf.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. BetacommandBot 07:42, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
The correct title for the article would be: "Party of Socialists-Revolutionaries", which is an accurate translation from Russian. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Winnie ru ( talk • contribs) 03:26, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: page moved. Malcolmxl5 ( talk) 18:51, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
The page was recently moved from the proposed title, and then the title subsequently finessed for punctuation, on the basis of it being a more direct translation of the Russian name (there was no RM or even informal discussion). However, the proposed/original form is clearly the standard rendering in the vast majority of book references, by some way (see section above), which is what we should go by. These often differ for political organisations, especially when it comes to the simple ordering of the words, eg with
NATO (when compared to the French version),
PSOE (from the original Spanish). See also, for example,
Britannica,
Merriam-Webster and what
appears to be one of their own publications etc for what is the preferred form. I would simply move it back myself but a) thought it worth doing formally as it was only recently moved away; and b) the proposed title is currently a redirect to this one and that redirect needs deleting.
N-HH
talk/
edits 10:13, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
ps: here are the Google Book links for ease of reference: "Party of Socialists-Revolutionaries" -
265 ... "Socialist Revolutionary Party" +Russia -
32,500. There'll obviously be quite a few false positives in the latter, but scrolling through the first few pages of results suggests you need to go some way in before they start kicking in (they seem to start on about the third page for the former).
N-HH
talk/
edits 10:50, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
This has been deleted from the article twice. Why? Kaplan was an SR, so it seems relevant.
Ghostofnemo ( talk) 05:00, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
How could its ideology have been "revolutionary socialism of democratic socialist and agrarian socialist forms"? These are three separate ideologies, and first being inconsistent with the second (i.e revolutionary and democratic). 203.80.61.102 ( talk) 20:51, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
The lede is about four times longer than it should be, in proportion to the article. Valetude ( talk) 06:44, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
Wikipedia is riddled with anachronical mentions of "democratic socialism". This is the left-wing equivalent of labelling pro-capitalist parties as libertarian - the application of a novel nomenclature to historical persons or groups that, even though they may have understood the general thrust of the term, would not associate it with its current understanding (and the way that it is described in the corresponding wikipedia article). 82.12.128.242 ( talk) 22:10, 5 March 2023 (UTC)