Although many Russians thought that the Constitutional Democrats, or Kadets, would be the party that would lead them through the Russian Revolution into the ranks of the Western European democracies, the Kadets were easily crushed by the Bolsheviks in the struggle for power. How the Kadets responded to the events of the revolution and failed at the time of the party's greatest crisis is the subject of William G. Rosenberg's study. As political history, the book examines the values, programs, organization, and tactices of Russia's most priminent liberal party from 1917 to 1921. As a study of the Russian Revolution and Civil War, it probes the strengths and weaknesses of the one political group whose politices did more to influence the outcome of events that any other political organization except the Bolsheviks. Based largely on party journals and emigre archives, the book focuses not only on the role of the Kadets in the revolution, but also on the broader issue of the relationship of Russiasn liberal politics to revolutionary social forces. William G. Rosenberg is Associate Professor of History at the University of Michigan. Originally published in 1974. The Princeton Legacy Library uses the latest print-on-demand technology to again make available previously out-of-print books from the distinguished backlist of Princeton University Press. These editions preserve the original texts of these important books while presenting them in durable paperback and hardcover editions. The goal of the Princeton Legacy Library is to vastly increase access to the rich scholarly heritage found in the thousands of books published by Princeton University Press since its founding in 1905.

FROST (copy 2): From the John Holmes Library collection.

Besides absolutists of the right (the tsar and his adherents) and left (Lenin and his fellow Bolsheviks), the Russian political landscape in 1917 featured moderates seeking liberal reform and a rapid evolution towards a constitutional monarchy. Vasily Maklakov, a lawyer, legislator and public intellectual, was among the most prominent of these, and the most articulate and sophisticated advocate of the rule of law, the linchpin of liberalism. This book tells the story of his efforts and his analysis of the reasons for their ultimate failure. It is thus, in part, an example for movements seeking to liberalize authoritarian countries today—both as a warning and a guide. Although never a cabinet member or the head of his political party—the Constitutional Democrats or “Kadets”—Maklakov was deeply involved in most of the political events of the period. He was defense counsel for individuals resisting the regime (or charged simply for being of the wrong ethnicity, such as Menahem Beilis, sometimes considered the Russian Dreyfus). He was continuously a member of the Kadets’ central committee and their most compelling orator. As a somewhat maverick (and moderate) Kadet, he stood not only between the country’s absolute extremes (the reactionary monarchists and the revolutionaries), but also between the two more or less liberal centrist parties, the Kadets on the center left, and the Octobrists on the center right. As a member of the Second, Third and Fourth Dumas (1907-1917), he advocated a wide range of reforms, especially in the realms of religious freedom, national minorities, judicial independence, citizens’ judicial remedies, and peasant rights.

There is a widespread notion that Russia is forever fated to be an authoritarian country where liberalism and democracy can never make real progress. However, at the beginning of the twentieth century there was an extremely influential “liberationist” movement which culminated in the formation of a modern, Western-style liberal party, the Constitutional Democrats or “Kadets”. The book provides a comprehensive history of the rise of the Kadets, focusing, in particular, on the revolutionary years 1905-06. It outlines how they dominated the first Duma elected by the people and analyses their policies, social composition and political tactics. The book challenges the view (shared by many historians) that the Kadets were inherently extreme, doctrinaire or unwilling to compromise, and argues that their eventual failure was primarily due to the intransigence of the old régime. The Russian Liberals and the Revolution of 1905 illustrates, in detail, that the Kadets offered a moderate alternative to reaction on the one hand and revolution on the other.