[watwut]

And very little of what they did would be possible without writing and reading. Peasants did not entered Russian politics in meaningful way at all. Simply, being illiterate to the point where you cant even improve on super behind farming also makes you pretty crappy at anything politics. Peasants attacked local rules here and there, then being bloodily suppressed wherever things got tight. That was it.

The monarchy, the military, the civil service, they were all "intelligentsia" too. "Liberal bourgeoisie" and capitalists were "intelligentsia" too. There were freaking 5 armies in Russia civil war. All 5 were led by people able to read and write. You all make it sound as if "intelligentsia" were uniformly Leninist or something. They were not, that is just the army that won. And I would be even super surprised if communists were the most educated of them all.

Yet also, the Russia monarchy was not exactly stable democratic functioning place until Lenin started revolution by the end of WWI out of nowhere.

I honestly hate when people who are supposedly against communist somehow adopt communist framing in completely absurd ways, down to blaming "intelligentsia" for whatever they perceive bad and down to attributing whole of Russian civil war to communists. I would really like to see someone use the term intelligentsia for like American journalist, teachers, or programmers. Lets all assume that all college educated people in American hold the same opinions. It is that stupid term.

[cyberdrunk]

Intelligentsia does not mean "educated people". For example, capitalists or the tzar's family were not part of Inteligentsia. A lof of the military officers weren't either.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligentsia

[watwut]

> "As a status class, the intelligentsia includes artists, teachers and academics, writers, and the literary hommes de lettres.[3][4] Individual members of the intelligentsia are known as intellectuals."

I would love to see analysis under which Stalin was intellectual. And people I mentioned (except maybe programmers) are not.

> "In Russia, before the Bolshevik Revolution (1917), the term intelligentsia described the status class of educated people whose cultural capital (schooling, education, enlightenment) allowed them to assume practical political leadership."

Yeah, pretty much anyone able to participate in politics. Which literally means every person participating in Russian politics is intelligentsia by this definition. Notably, while not all officers and capitalists participated, those who did would be counted as intelligentsia. And they did participate and even achieved some.

> "In Eastern Europe, intellectuals were deprived of political influence and access to the effective levers of economic development; the intelligentsia were at the functional periphery of their societies."

Can confirm that intellectuals were hated by communists.

Calling communists intelligentsia is one way to delegitimize them, precisely because of their disdain for this class. That was strong political point and rhetoric, but fails when you then try to make it a point about impact of education on person.

[cyberdrunk]

> I would love to see analysis under which Stalin was intellectual

The Wikipedia article conflates intelligentsia with intellectuals, which I don't agree with (I'm Polish, so I have some long-ingrained intuitions regarding those terms). Stalin, as an educated non-wealthy person (he studied to become a priest), can easily be seen as someone who is a member of inteligentsia.

> Which literally means every person participating in Russian politics is intelligentsia by this definition.

Tzar family or many of the old aristocratic families were not a member of intelligentsia and would probably be offended by the association. The key factor of being in inteligentsia was (from Wiki): "people engaged in the complex mental labours". The higher classes didn't do any labor.

[watwut]

You argued that "intelligentsia does not mean educated people". Now you are classifying Stalin with finished elementary school at 16 and seminary studies as intelligentsia.

> The key factor of being in inteligentsia was (from Wiki): "people engaged in the complex mental labours".

Stalin was not engaged in the complex mental labors, outside of seminary he engaged in revolutionary politics basically.

The very same wikipedia has multiple definitions for inteligentsia - including specifically Russian one from pre-revolution I quoted. Which defines inteligentsia as people educated enough to engage in politics. Which does include Stalin and pretty much everyone else involved in Russian politics.

> Tzar family or many of the old aristocratic families were not a member of intelligentsia and would probably be offended by the association. The higher classes didn't do any labor.

I did not made that definition, wiki did.

Monarchy had more supporters then just Tzar and old aristocratic families. And again, old aristocratic families did actually engaged in ruling and leading. And then you have waste groups of lower aristocracy running smaller things. The country was under constant internal conflict and pressure. They did not done labor, they did politics a lot.

And group of people who had don't politics or who have been educated cant be reasonably reduced to "Stalin vs Tsar". Somehow, people pushing for reforms (too little too late success, but still) don't exist. Liberals dont exist. Capitalists dont exist or dont engage with politics. That is not even realistic. Monarchis trying for milder reforms dont exist.