/ ANALYSIS OF ARTICLE “NATIONAL AND ETHNIC” /

Ph.D., Associate Professor G.K. Mukanova

al-Farabi Kazakh National University

Gulnar_mukanova@mail.ru

В данной статье освещены «белые пятна» истории Казкрая и взгляды государственного деятеля, экономиста, литератора, популяризатора казахской культуры и языка, организатора высшей школы и национального театра, незаслуженно репрессированного наркома образования Смагула Садвокасова (1900-1933)  по вопросам устойчивого развития региона. Автор статьи «Националы и национальности» и других аналитических публикаций, Садвокасов еще в конце 20-х годов ХХ века отстаивал право Казахстана на самостоятельное промышленное развитие.

 During the formation of the autonomy of Kazakhstan and the first decade of the state of the RSFSR, then – the Soviet Union, in historiography and public opinion created by Soviet scientists and the media, is presented primarily as a stage of political disputes and repression. Meanwhile, in the historical period for discussion include fundamental issues of sustainable resettlement of the republic on the agenda imposed a survey of natural resources, border / territorial themes, social strategy.

The study Sadvokasov’s publication has its own history. Its contents have declined at party forums, it wrote “responses.” Publication of “arrested” by the NKVD, so that until recently acquainted with its content was almost impossible.
By studying archival documents, we found evidence of those events, which cost the life of 33-year-old founder of the Young Communist League, the Kazakh theater, Kazpedvuz, the People’s Commissar of Education. Term of the article in the Moscow magazine “Bolshevik» № 1 for 1928 with the catchy title of “National and nationality”, drawn by the fault of the editorial board, incriminate the author as “deviationism.”

Smagul even published a rebuttal in the “Truth of the East» № 40 dated 17 February 1928 on the misuse of his editorship of the journal article “Bolshevik”, but his actions were regarded as part of the commission Goloshekin, Bogdanov, Yusupbekov “usual ploy.”

For the first time on the “biases” in the party spoke Joseph Stalin, which was the unspoken appeal to the search for “deviants” in the field. This can be seen by the curious document “Letter addressed to Comrade. IV Stalin Kazakh students from the Central Asian Communist University of Tashkent “from October 14, 1925 In the latter said:” We want to prove of lining Bukeikhanov various political career and the company … These deviations are stated in your speech about the tasks of the Communist University of the Toilers of the East “- Why was inveigle students in political proceedings of dubious sense, we can only guess.

Sadvokasov himself denied that the party slopes, clear articulation of this view at a party plenum that in the context of the speech of the leader, sounded ominous. The delegate of the Tenth Congress of the CPSU (b) in an advisory capacity, alternately – Commissar of Education, People’s Commissar of Finance, Chairman of the State Planning Commission, he had his own opinion and common sense to challenge the absurdity.

A close reading of lifetime publications executives Kazkray in central and local press reports and transcripts of debates, brochures and instructions, it is easy to make a holistic impression on their serious work on sustainable development in the region. Period of repression “nationals” knocked at the root of the paradigm of social arrangement, throwing back Kazakhstan, and with it the whole of Central Asia. Destruction of copyright works extremely complicated process of reconstruction of the truth.

You can try to refute this opinion, citing replicated in the Soviet period, collections resolutions party conferences. Official publication would really obscure “live” discussion on ways of building a harmonious society and the state, if not eyewitness accounts, memoirs of friends and relatives.
The difficulty impartial analysis is that the media themselves that period were formed at the same time. With the change of the capitals of the Republic and the alphabet had to make an effort to rally the literacy rate. Reading and writing was less than desirable, especially in rural areas. – This is stated in the Reports for the 1921-1924 KazGlavpolitprosvet. Whose employees engaged in the organization of the Red caravan clubs for the eradication of illiteracy, both among children and adults alike.

The next obstacle was, as stated above, political repression, and they were made and the chief editors of national media. They were at different times of the CPC executives Kazakhstan, Commissar of Education, Bureau members Kazobkom (Ryskulov Jandosov, Baitursynov, Sadvokasov, etc.). Accordingly, newspapers and magazines with their articles also became targets of attacks and “attacks.”

Article S.Sadvokasov “National and nationals” in the magazine “Bolshevik» № 1 for 1928 predetermined his fate. And not only him, but the whole layer of the national intelligentsia and sympathizers. The publication has been known to “sentenced”, it is no accident offensive output was accompanied by editorial comment. As usual, in the next issue of “Bolshevik” were organized by “local voice”.

Artificial delay to the publication of the discussion initially led to the fact that its content was at odds with the decisions of the party, and in the person of the author – S.Sadvokasov – which by then parted with their views publicly, was created by the image of “deviationist” ” the group’s leader, “etc. with all the “aggravating”.

The paper was given by the author to the editor ahead of time, by his own passionate post on the 3 party plenum, or before August 1927. Plenum led Goloshchekin, which was only presented information at hand. Having a direct relationship with Moscow and party publications because of his authority, he intervened in the plan of publishing houses, and there was something the author did not expect.

Returning to the content of the publication, the articles of the central leaders of the national media have sought to raise the scale of the most pressing problems and offer concrete solutions. Accordingly, if you move away from the political hype around the ill-fated article Smagul Sadvokasov consistently and fundamentally concerned opinion outlined the strategic development of Kazakhstan. He did not avoid posing serious problems and insisted on their sound decision.

The article is the culmination of the vision-known public figure of Kazakhstan the first third of the 20th century Smagul Sadvokasov features of the development of the country.

One can hardly doubt creep in how young people’s commissar of education (a post he held in recent years) was competent in matters of zoning Kazakhstan, diversification or national-territorial delimitation.

Archival materials impartially support the fact that Sadvokasov valued for the knowledge economy, land registry and finance. So, he was unanimously elected President of the State Planning Commission of Kazakhstan during the difficult period of understaffing. In 1921, the documents listed his specialty, in accordance with the diploma of the Siberian Institute of agriculture and industry in Omsk – “agronomist”. In the works of other researchers that fact on Higher Education Commissar simply made his secondary vocational education – Omsk Agricultural School.

Sadvokasov outlined his views on the relationship of ethical priority in economic and social breakthrough in the region, through the prism of national identity. – Such publications are always with great care were perceived by critics and censors, especially in the Eastern European area of ​​Russia, and during the “anti-bias” – even more so.

Bold stuff, with the calling the fire itself header from the far edge of the city center which was seen as a space of illiteracy and medieval traditions, became an easy prey to those who were prepared to expose the far-fetched “enemies.”

Although, to be objective, in June 1921, at the First All-Kazakh party conference on 21-year-old said Smagul Sadvokasov Bolshevik V.Radus-Zenkovich: “Comrade published brochures. Sadvokasov work among the youth in the amount of several thousand copies (!) “. – This episode describes the trust relationship Communist-Leninists to local cadres, it was unbiased, unlike Goloschekin fabrications. Especially because Smagul beginning of the 20’s was a major figure on the scale of the federation: he was a member of the Youth League, a member of the East Central Bureau of Youth in Moscow. (This data set us on Archives Kazobkom for 1921).

At the party conference Radus-Zenkovich respectfully answered and erudition Alikhan Bukeikhanov and willingness to cooperate with the last Soviet government: “… As for the old Bukeikhanov – he is the best expert on the region. It must skillfully use. His influence can be, will have to continue to influence the ordinary technician, but he quickly oriented in the local environment, which is a great help. He – a real encyclopedic on the part of Kazakh life, history of the region in general. No book can not replace it. More to us of such workers, of course, subject to our direct supervision and guidance. We tried to consider all the skilled to use them in educational efforts. It’s clear that all the boundless steppe difficult to assert their influence. Especially since the one in the home. And you, comrades from the field, a lot of you have done for the mobilization of all Kazakh cultural forces in the struggle against illiteracy, take into account whether any of these forces?! “.

Experienced leader, Radus-Zenkovich thus publicly rebuffed those who tried to negotiate the former head of “Alash” (“old Bukeikhanov.” This expression is understandable that the Central Executive Committee of the provincial Party Conference on Semipalatinsk (January 1922), was elected and became Chairman of the Kazakh Central Executive Committee of his own brother, Gabdulkhakov Nurmuhamedovich Bukeikhanov, born 1897.

Despite his youth, Smagul Sadvokasov in their written applications to the central organs of the party, articles, speeches boldly put questions of principle. His candor and uncompromising enemies he has acquired, especially among those whom he criticized for work. Sincerely believing in Lenin proclaimed a national policy, it, hoping to find understanding applied to the Central Executive Committee and even made a personal audience with Stalin, as mentioned in the plenum of the Kazakh Communist Party organization 3.

What he wanted to convey to the audience the Union? Twenty Years of Independence of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the change of the concept of historical science encouraged the public to objective coverage of “white spots”. And today the submission of former leaders of the problems of sustainable development of the region can be analyzed.

In practice, in Kazakhstan the time explaining the state and party policies, decrees and directives of sorts took place one-sided, only in Russian, which is understood as a minority of the population. It artificially cuts off a lot of the indigenous population from the effects of propaganda, and to gain awareness of current and future plans. Picking up this problem, S.Sadvokasov was in the open obstruction by Goloshekin and his ilk; Sadvokasov accused of Pan-Turkism, nationalism, etc. “slopes”.

Calculate the probability of such attacks, Smagul clearly outlined the substance of the controversy in the title, defeating the term more accurately label: “nationals.” And – consistently presented the arguments in favor of a self-sustaining development of the periphery, the role of which was assigned to the Kazakh SSR.

Sadvokasov been whipped in a rather insulting manner. Software publication which outlined the basic concepts that are contrary to the national policy of the Federation, was defame and long Smagul name has become synonymous with “Kazakh” opposition. It was considered the “Don Quixote” that protects “bai” and “aul”.

The struggle against Trotskyism, Kamenev, Zinoviev bloc coincided with obstruction of the Kazakh Communist and alash, the plan for “cleansing” the republic’s leadership was thrown to the wolves last.

By studying the documents, it is important to understand how Smagul grew over the years to guide the edge: if you believe his entourage, in the years of study in Omsk, he was a “Tolstoyan”. – Tolstoyanism emerged as a trend in Russia and in the world thanks to the creativity and original interpretation of the social relations of Leo Tolstoy. “Non-resistance to evil,” the rejection of violence, self-improvement, tolerance were followers of the teachings credo classic literature.
Life Smagul tempered, he joined the “Alash”, necessarily – in the RCP (b) in 1920, but even in the public debate with his Goloshekin noticeable delay in establishing the truth, tact, ability to discuss. Yes, he just expressed his righteous indignation, seeing injustice. – So, during trips to Semipalatinsk, learning about the facts of arrogance on the part of the communists he cited egregious examples made in 1921 in Moscow.

The views and acts Sadvokasova would grace the history of any country in the world, so they are rational and perfect. The article S.Sadvokasov develops his views on the territorial structure of the Republic, the role of poliyazychiya (indigenization) and traditional economic structures. He put forward the idea that the transformation of Kazakhstan into a raw material appendage of the neighboring countries the status of an autonomy.

He writes with conviction and that the railways are used inefficiently, one-sided. Export of raw materials drops back edge, it’s time to move on to the construction of factories, think about the prospects of the national economy.
Forward-thinking, educated, popular in Kazkrae and beyond, the leaders made their way to the sustainable development of the region. As far as timely and meaningful proposals were “nationals” and meet the state of the economy and the social base of the republic, which would acquire Kazkray, so their views were inconsistent with the position of leadership.

A comparative content analysis of the views of the “natskadrov” makes bow their heads in front of their knowledge and untimely passing. In the context of decolonization, from the point of view of modern economists put forward by the “national” view of the harmonious development of the border regions, subject to implementation, rendered a great service to the region.

The apogee of the fight with the “National” was the discussion about the method of the industrialization of the USSR, which was conducted in Moscow party members and economists professing two approaches: the “genetic” (development should be based on the laws of current trends) and “teleological” (development plan focused on the future structural changes and strict discipline of labor). In the end, the debate (which also resulted in the defeat of the Left Opposition Stalin) won the second – supporters of forced industrialization, not evolution of the economy.

Something similar happened in the periphery. Evolutionists or close to those of the views and had hard times here. Sadvakasov and secretary of the Council of Nationalities of the USSR Central Sanjar Asfendiyarov KASSR leadership in the face of Goloshekin heavily criticized for “deviationism” expresses a desire to “nationals” first to industrialise the margin to the level of the center, and then develop together.

Another thing, what were the plans Goloshekin in respect of existing facilities – in the most severe form was collectivized and sedentarization. It is more expedient, believed Smagul to organize co-operatives in the Steppes, and then supply the textile mills at least semi-finished products. It turned out that article came out after making XV Party Congress, committed the defeat of evolutionists.

Having entered into a controversy with F. Goloshekin, Sadvokasov put forward the idea of ​​industrialization with the maximum benefit for the country and taking into account its economic opportunities, and natural and human resources. He played for the accelerated industrialization of the country, the comprehensive development of those industries for which the country has all the conditions: raw materials and local labor, and opposed the mass migration to the country of “free” labor from other regions.

Soon after the formation of the Kazakh Autonomous Republic passed a law according to which the Kazakh language on a par with the Russian language is declared public. In this regard, the institutions as necessary work was carried out in record keeping in the Kazakh language, as well as to ensure the ability of agency staff speak with visitors in their national language. This problem did not leave the agendas of conferences, meetings and conventions. Goloshchekin thought kazahizatsiya should be conducted in all organizations, except for the party, “The central organs of the party are in Russian, so work in the Party organizations should only be conducted in Russian.”

Sadvakasov disputed this, saying that “the party in the country is working with the Kazakh population, it interacts with the Kazakh Communists. Why did not she can carry out their work in the Kazakh language? … “
What is the nature of origin label of “nationals”? This term is found in a number of sources: print media, correspondence, letters of instruction, used in everyday party-Soviet activity of cells of the CPSU (b).

(There was another term – “ethnic groups”, short for “minorities.” Last designated representatives residing in the Republic of ethnic minorities, in this case Taranchey (Uighur), Sart (Uzbek), Dungan, Poles, Jews, etc. Accordingly, Party cell led them to record and periodically reports compiled and handed over to the column “ethnic groups” term was commonplace and are used in proceedings.)

In the definition of “nationals” noticeable evolution of its content. This was reflected in the party’s documentation about passed in 1926 by Congress in Moscow nationals. In resonance letters Kazakh leadership unfavorably commented the idea of ​​the Congress. In particular, discussed the differences between T.Ryskulov as organizer of the forum, and M. Kalinin, who red-tape alignment for its holding.

With the fact of convening and holding the congress in Kazakhstan, after the letters of instruction from Moscow, has changed dramatically. The organizers and participants were questioned, accused of separatism, write articles about their “grouping”. Formed the notorious “public opinion.” Ryskulov after the Congress was in the doghouse for a while he was exiled to Kazakhstan, was appointed editor of the newspaper “Eңbekshіl Kazak”, but soon was transferred back to Moscow. On the one hand, it was indispensable in dealing with “national” on the other – to look after him.

 Subject national self-determination pushed S.Sadvokasov to serious reflection on the nature of power and the role of ethnicity. By linking their political and public work, extensive knowledge with the realities of the relationship center and the autonomy of Union republics, he boldly stated his views, ahead of even a short period of time allotted to him. The scientific, logic article is not in doubt.
But instead of discussing and considering the opinions “from the field”, the Stalinist quorum at the root of destroying any attempts to understanding the progress of socio-economic processes. Ergonometriya, logistics infrastructure is not a regional party chiefs were taken into account, because of passion command-administrative methods.

Independent Kazakhstan on the new turn of the spiral deals with the harmonization on the basis of innovative start breakthrough projects.

Sources and literature:

1. Smaғұl Sәduaқasұly. – Taңdamaly. – Volume 1. Құrast. B.Dәrіmbetov. – Almaty, 1993. See Opinion KazkrayKK (Control Commission) in the case of a member of the CPSU (b) comrade. Sadvokasov Smagul on May 21, 1928 – AP RK. F. 719. Op. 1. D. 1049.

2. AP RK /Archive of the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan/ F. 719. Op. 1-719. D. 65.

3. AP RK. F.139. op.1. d 33.

4. AP RK, f. 139, 1-139 inventory, 2.

5. AP RK. F. 139, Op. 1, 33.

6. See AP RK. F. 139. Op.1, 33.

7. For the leader Amalbaev service does not disappear / / “Expert Kazakhstan”. – № 21 (312). – May 30, 2011.

8. Kulbayev T. Son of the people / / The country and the world number 30 (472). – March 26, 2011.

9. Koshanov AK National economic interests and property relations. 2nd ed. – Almaty, 2010.

10. Koshanov AK A difficult climb. In the ways of the market. Selected Works. – Astana, 2004.

11. Қamzabekұly D. Smaғұl Saduaқasұly zhane “Kyzyl Kazakhstan” / / “Aқiқat.” – 2011. – № 5.

12. Mukanova G.K. Central Asian national-territorial delimitation 20s. Manifesto of the 20th century and Smagul Sadvokasov / / Bulletin KazNU. Series historicity. – 2012 number 1 (64), SS. 51-59.

13. Mukanova G.K. Tolyk adam or ecology ethnicity. – A., Kazak University. – 2012.