REVIEWS 593 call for balanced advocacy but askshow she can be an effectivevoice for the Roma when they are tryingto findtheirown voice (p. I97)? Rich material informs each chapter, written with sensitivity but without indulgence. In the 'Foreword' Nancy Ries notes that most importantly, anthropologists can reveal the role of agency, individual and collective, on structureitself(p. x). In a region where not long ago the researchthat informs thisbook was not possible, this is an especiallydramaticdemonstrationof the importantcontributionthat anthropologycan make. Department ofAnthropology SUSAN PATTIE University College London Nersesiants, Vladik Sumbatovich. TheCivilism Manifesto.TheNationalIdeaof RussiaintheHistorical Questfor Equality, Freedom, andJustness. Translatedby William E. Butler. Simmonds and Hill Publishing for the Vinogradoff Institute,London, 2000. iii + 46 pp. Preface.Appendix. Priceunknown. FASCINATING on three different levels, this tract by Academician V. S. Nersesiants,skilfullytranslatedby AcademicianW. E. Butler,setsout the preeminent legal philosopher's view of what should be the guiding theoretical frameworkforpost-socialistRussia.Writtenclearlyand concisely, it is a work of high aspiration, culminating however in a practical suggestion of the essential way forward for Russia's social and legal reforms. Especially for a reader from the common law legal tradition,it is an eye-opener. The work is remarkable on account of its content, the manner in which the ideas are expressed, and also the way that Nersesiants's vision fits within Russian culturaltradition. In brief, Nersesiants postulates that post-Socialist Russia has the unique opportunityto move forwardto a new stage of development, which he labels as 'civilism' or 'civilitarian society'. The key is a different approach to ownership. Nersesiants eschews the recent attempts in Russia to destatize or privatize property formally held under socialist ownership, which he sees as having failedin theiraim (nevermade explicit)of creatinga Westerncapitalist system. Instead, he characterizesthe result as more like feudalism,with wide divisions between the current 'haves' and 'have nots'. Nersesiants posits an alternative approach, where a new kind of ownership, civilist ownership, allows everyone in Russia to participate in the national bounty, each citizen having an equal participatoryshare in a pool of national wealth. The social consequences of such a reform would be extremely positive, allowing true equality, freedom and justness in a rule-of-law state, and counteracting the various centrifugal forces in current Russian society. In Nersesiants's view, this new development is only possible as a resultof Russia'sbitter experience of Soviet socialism, and thereforeif she follows his proposalsRussia can lead the way forthe world, towardsa better formof society. Whilst not wishing to comment on the merits of Nersesiants's ideas, it is strikingto read such a work of high theory. Especiallyperhaps for a reviewer coming from a relativist background in the United Kingdom, with all its post-colonial doubts in an environment of international uncertainty, the 594 SEER, 8o, 3, 2002 magnificentview of certaintyand truth,of universalsand absolutespresented by Nersesiantsis breathtaking.The linguisticstyle as well as the content gives thisworkan unusualsignificance. The third factor which gripped this reviewer's attention are the echoes within the work of Russia's ideological past. There are two aspects to this. Nersesiants's formulation for civilist ownership, the system and its management are described in chapter 3, p. 15 f. Each citizen would get an equal participatoryshare of a fund of property, with periodic reallocation. Whilst Nersesiantsis not explicit,giving each a rightto an 'equalparticipatoryshare' seemsakinto treatingRussiaasa hugepeasants'mir,to use apre-revolutionary image, or a kholkhoz(collective farm) in post-revolutionary terms. The participatoryshare seems to be undifferentiated;as describedby Nersesiants each citizen would have their right to civilist ownership, but it is personal, lifetime, and inalienable. This method of including citizens in a share of the national wealth seems generally reminiscent of the more collective approach to land ownershipwhich had pertainedfor the Russianpeasant. The second aspectof Nersesiants'sthesiswhich drawson Russia'spast ishis explicit evocation of Russia's unique qualitieswhich would allow her to fulfil the historic mission of leading the world towards the new form of society. Marxism may no longer be the ruling theory, but belief in societal stages of development runs through this work. History is notjust a matterof accident, but has goals to be achieved. Civilismcan be 'the Russian contributionto the worldwide-historicalprogress of freedom and equality of people' (p...
Read full abstract
Mar 13, 2024
Upendra Kumar Srivastava 
Open Access
