Nihilism In Russia

Nihilism is more than repudiating, believing in nothing, and lack of morals and principles in Russia. It does include these characteristics, however there is more to it then what is on the surface. Before we can discuss what nihilism is for the Russian, we have to examine what chained of events occurred that ultimately created this subculture. During Alexander II’s civic reforms, various oppositional movements emerged challenging the empire. Alexander II restored to some extent polish autonomy, expanded education, and encouraged “public discussion of the emancipation of the serfs” including leniency in public speaking (speeches were still somewhat regulated or censored). Poland were divided into people led by Marquis Alexander Wielopolski

who saw an interest in working with the Russian government (taking reforms further and gaining polish civic nationhood) and people who saw an opportunity to gain independence and reclaim lost territories in Lithuania and Belorussia in the eighteenth-century partition. The Poles who were against the Russian government attempted to kill Wielopolski, so he enlisted them into the Russian army, however they fled to the woods and formed “partisan bands.” These “partisan bands” did not have support of a large amount of peasants, they were later captured and executed, polish nobleman were exiled, serfs in Poland, Belorussia, Ukraine were emancipated with harsh policies for both peasants and landlords, polish officials were replaced by Russians, Russian language became the language for businesses and education, and the church were eradicated. In addition, the intelligentsia sought scientific base doctrine that would allow them to help the people, socialism emerged. Mikhail Bakunin, son of a wealthy landowner in Tver guberniia learned about socialism through German philosophy. He was the prophet of revolution and he believed that revolution was around the corner. His significance was attributed with his belief that Russian peasants would get rid of bureaucracy in Europe in restore democracy. Alexander Herzen another socialist believed that peasants need to be truly free and given lands, “Land and Freedom” became the slogan of the fist socialist generation. In 1861, Herzen was pushed aside by a new generation who were “less ambivalent thinkers” . In this new generation, Nikolai Chernyshevskii emerged crystallizing Herzen’s ideas in What Is to Be Done?, where he brought the idea of political activist conspiring for a forthcoming revolution. Many students were inspired by this ideology of conspiracy and they spread revolutionary propaganda and murdered government officials including assassinating the Tsar after many attempts. Others rejected violence and sought a different peaceful way to resolve these issues. Ely wrote, “there was a turn toward the politics of culture and private life in a looser movement that attempted to change society by reformulating everyday values and practices.” These new intellects were known as students or “new people” dubbed by Chernyshevskii. Ivan Turgenev attempted to analyze and understand this young generation of intellects in his novel Fathers and Son and called them Nihilists.
Nihilism was not about class, rebellious teens, or any organized violent conspiracy movement.

Nihilism did have its political aspect- hoping to become a democracy, but it was not necessarily a revolution in the context of any of the previous rebellious groups mentioned above. Certainly, nihilism was not just rejection of everything like the meaning of the word suggests. Russian nihilism was a way to create a new identity under a united belief. It was a way to change Russia and for Russia to ultimately be a model for change in

Europe.
Regressing to the novel Fathers and Son, the term Nihilism was given to this new generation as an attempt to capture who they are and what they stand for.

It is important to keep in mind that Turgenev was an outsider belonging to the Romanticism age, he was not a nihilist. He was attempting to capture their value, their philosophy, and to depict who they are. The hero of the novel, Bazarov was the son of a poor doctor, he worked and put himself through school, he did not steal from others, and he never asked anyone including his parents for charity. Bazarov emerged from his life experience and his education, a strong man of intellect and an empiricist. Being an empiricist, he believed that all knowledge originated from sense experience, thus he “acknowledge[d] only what can be examined with one of the five senses.” He called human feelings Romanticism. According to Bosorav, principles were unnecessary, authority and morals are nonsense. He said, “A nihilist is a man who doesn’t acknowledge any authorities, who doesn’t accept a single principle on faith no matter how much that principle may be surrounded by respect.” The concept of love for a woman and the beauty of art, music, and nature was utterly nonsense. Bazarov repeatedly reminded the reader that he does not have a belief system, but in actuality he did. Pisarev calls it calculation, but I call it survival. The latter is very informal, but in a nut shell that is what it was. Bazarov took medicine when he was sick

although he does not believe in medicine or eternal life. In other words Bazarov “pays the price of a minor unpleasantness in order to secure greater comfort in the future or deliverance from a greater unpleasantness… he chooses the lesser of two evils, although he feels no attraction to the lesser evil” (198). To sum up, Bazarov does whatever he wants or what he deems more beneficial. Furthermore, Bazarov is harshly direct. Regardless of any readers’ emotion towards him, they respect him for his sincerity.