Jewish Philanthropy and Enlightenment in Late-Tsarist Russia

13. Building Institutions between the Revolutions

13 Building Institutions between the Revolutions I t is not difficult to imagine the hopes that were inspired by the tsar’s concession to establish a state Duma and the freedoms, albeit circumscribed , of political assembly and expression.1 With increased freedom , opportunities for the OPE to expand its operations grew. At the same time, it was feared that new reactionary rulings might close the OPE or at least weaken it. Typifying the attitude of OPE liberals, V. I. Gessen, the political leader from Odessa who defined himself as Russian Orthodox by religion and Jewish by nationality, feared extra-legal action such as a putsch from the right. A climactic break in Russia’s historical fate is connected with the date of October 17 [1905], acquired at the price of countless and difficult sacrifices. This date created for Russia the possibility of peaceful evolution and the progressive development of the infinite wealth of the people’s spirit. The great danger that threatens the country’s resurrection is that the rebirth of its legal system has not yet stabilized. [. . .] Let us avoid the repetition of fatal and irrevocable mistakes, let us remember that the promise of Russia’s rebirth, gained through many terrible hardships, lies in the rule of law and only in it.2 Making allusions to the government’s transgressions of its own laws and in particular to Stolypin’s summary military executions of suspected revolutionaries , Gessen expressed the hope that the protection of rights under 190 the law would provide the foundation on which civil society could build a democratic Russia. The law regarding independent societies and unions decreed on March 4, 1906, drastically changed the environment by permitting the establishment of independent artistic, cultural, and political societies. In this new context, those groups within the OPE that had clung to the organization in order to have a secure cover for their activities could now declare their independence.3 The historical commission, under the lead of Simon Dubnov , was the first to leave. It held its first meeting as the Jewish Ethnographic and Historical Society in October 1907. The Society of Lovers of Jewish Literature also became an independent organization. Similarly, the Jewish Music Society was formed, and many societies with local philanthropic aims left the OPE, such as those which provided aid to teachers in Moscow or to poor students in Minsk.4 Post-1905 left the OPE in a vacuum: in a Russia full of new possibilities , which direction should the organization take? Before anything else, the leadership decided to democratize by promoting power sharing with provincial activists. In a meeting of the board on December 23, 1906, Leon Bramson proposed that the OPE should rush to open branches throughout the country. In addition, he wanted to modify the charter, codifying the process by which branches could open and close and thereby protect the assets of the society against any eventuality, especially if the organization were to be shut down.5 Changes in the St. Petersburg center, its relations to the periphery, and the ways funds were collected and distributed portended improvement for the school program. At the December 26, 1906, general meeting, Jacob Halpern explained why the charter needed rewriting. Earlier the OPE had devoted itself to promoting enlightenment in the most general terms, but now the new charter should spell out the right “to open various types of educational institutions , libraries, general and Jewish courses, and special courses (preparatory, remedial, etc . . .) for Jewish teachers.” The OPE also needed to be able “to organize readings, discussion groups, museums, and exhibits and to encourage others to open and organize them.” Finally, the new charter should protect the OPE’s right to “collect and analyze data about the education of Jews and provide aid to existing educational institutions, teachers, and students. The OPE publishes its own books and newspapers and distributes them by sale or free of charge and encourages others to do the same.”6 Revising the charter, OPE leaders underscored the transformation of Building Institutions between the Revolutions 191 the society since the early 1890s. Schools, teacher training, and alternative learning contexts (evening courses, mobile museums, readings, exhibits, and discussion groups) were placed at the forefront. At the same time, the OPE also tried to institute changes in relations between the center and periphery. Branches were now encouraged to raise and spend their own money in order to satisfy their own needs. The...