Abstract
After a temporary decline in research interest in the history of the Russian working class and its regional groups in the 1990s, it was revived at the beginning of the 21st century, primarily in those aspects that were previously on the periphery of the scientific space or were controversial. The Urals historians M. A. Feldman and S. P. Postnikov, whose works are rightly considered a major achievement of modern Ural historiography, made a great contribution to their study. At the same time, a number of scientists’ theses, in our opinion, need adjustment and additional substantiation. This article is dedicated to solving this problem. The provisions on the absence of social and class unity of the mining workers of the Urals and the political split between its individual categories, the definition of political views of workers of the industrial era, to which the authors class workers of the industry, as reformist, and other issues (more private ones) were subjected to consideration and critical assessment. As a result of the analysis, it was concluded that the existing differences between certain categories of Ural workers are not the basis for denying the unity of their socio-cultural and mental space, typical of all methods of social reflection and general behavior patterns. This indicates a need for further study of this issue.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
More From: Bulletin of Udmurt University. Series History and Philology
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.