Author Email: firstname.lastname@example.org
The relations of labor and capital in Russia were entangled in patriarchal remnants and their compliance with the standards of the industrial era was becoming one of the major social problems, from the solution of which the industrial development of the country depended in many respects. Considering the significance of the Urals in Russian economy, the analysis of the local bourgeoisie position concerning the working issue solution is of an undoubted interest. It was characterized by the combination of liberal approaches with the conservative views of mining workers, which, considering local specifics, regarded the solution of the land issue, the restriction of factory inspection functions and the removal of the state administration interference in the relations between the workers and the bourgeoisie as the main means of the working issue settling.
Bourgeoisie, Workers, The Urals, Factory Legislation, Revolution.
Introduction to the problem : The competitive or the cooperative nature of labor and capital interaction is a timeless factor of production relations in the industrial and postindustrial era. The development of a civilized type of relations between workers and employers largely depends on its competent decision, which, as the world practice shows, significantly influences the effectiveness of the country social and economic development and the stability of society.
Problem relevance At the end of the XIXth century Russia was at the stage of transition from the traditional to the industrial society. The modern Russian society is in the same transitional state. With this in mind, the study of intergroup interaction peculiarities between bourgeoisie and the working class in the early 20th century is not only of scientific, but also of practicalpolitical interest. The study of this subject matter complex using the regional example of the mining
Ural and its comparison with the current situation will make it possible to identify long-term risk factors and minimize their negative impact on the socio-economic development of the country.
Obviously, the position of the Ural bourgeoisie on the working issue is quite contradictory. On the one hand, it took into account the peculiarities of its region development, the psychology of the local population, and proposed those recipes to solve the working issue that took into account local specifics. This, in its turn, it contributed considerably to the preservation of the historically formed type of production. At the same time, it was under the considerable influence of the liberal tradition. In general, it exaggerated the influence of the patriarchal component of intergroup relations and was utopian in its own way, which was really confirmed by the events of the Russian revolutions of the early 20th century, when mass antibourgeois sentiments became the leading trend in the group consciousness of the social lower classes, and the increase of violence towards it exceeded general Russian parameters in the Urals.
480 total views, 1 views today